t>o 


X 


THE  GIFT  OF 

MAY  TREAT  MORRISON 

IN  MFMORY  OF 

ALEXANDER  F  MORRISON 


INTRODUCTION 


TO 


THE   STUDY   OF   SOCIOLOGY 


By  J.  H.  W.  STUCKENBERa. 
Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Philosophy. 

With   ail    Appendix    and    Index.      Gtli   edition. 

Crown  Svo,  cloth,  net,  Sl-.W. 

The  volume  U  inlendeJ  to  be  (in  Introduction 
to  tilt'  Stint//  of  J'/iilosoplii/,  and  eieri/l/iixri 
fiii.1  heen  (iilnpted  to  t/iis  spri-ifii-  aim.  It  is  not  an 
eniyilojiiidia,  nor  is  it  iutt-nded  as  an  iutruibiction 
to  any  particular  philosophical  system — or  to  the 
liialory  of  the  various  systems  —  but  to  the  study  of 
Philosophy  itself. 

The  author  holds  that  philosophy  is  not  taiiyht, 
but  thought;  that  Ihouijht  is  never  appropriated 
errept  by  mental  elaboration,  and  that  the  best 
preparation  fur  philosophii  consists  in  clear,  pro- 
found, and  independent  thinking. 

Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Sociology. 

With  <i.niph-ti-   Index.     Crown  ^vo,  clotli,  m  t, 

For  sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent  by  mail,  post- 
paid, on  receipt  of  price,  by  the  publishers, 

A.  C.   ARMSTRONG   &   SON, 

51  Kaat  Tenth  Street  (.near  Broadway),  New  York. 


INTRODUCTION 


TO    THE 


STUDY    OF    SOCIOLOGY 


BY 


J.  H.  W.  STUCKENBERG 

^finbtr   of  tf)e   }3f)iIoBopf)icaI   Socictn   of  Brrlin 

AUTHOR  OF   "  INTRODUCTION   TO   THE   STUDY    OF   PHILOSOPHY" 

"the     life    of    IMMANUEL    KANT,"     "TENDENCIES 

IN    GERMAN    THOUGHT,"    ETC. 


SECOND    EDITION 


A.    C.    ARMSTRONG    AND    SON 

51  East  10""  Street,  near  Bkuadway 
1898 


Copyright,  1897, 
Br  J.  H.  W.  Stuckenbero. 


Wnibrrsitu  ^Brrsa : 
John  WiijjoN  AM)  Sun,  Ca.miihiduk,  U.S.A. 


ISIS 


DEDICATED 

TO 

W.  D.  MILLER,  M.D. 

K.  ^rofrssor  \\\  tf)t  Knibersitg  of  Bfrltn. 

oc 

2  PROMOTEK    OF    SCIENCE. 

FKIEND     OF     HUMANITY. 


«: 

u. 
O 

t 


4S3045 


PREFACE. 


THE  title  gives  the  exact  aim  of  the  vohime. 
An  elaborated  system  of  Sociology  is  not 
attempted  ;  but  the  purpose  is  to  lay  the  basis  for 
sociological  study,  to  designate  the  problems  in- 
volved, and  to  aid  the  begmner  in  the  solution  of 
these  problems.  This  purpose  has  determined  the 
character  of  the  volume  and  furnishes  the  criterion 
by  which  its  contents  must  be  judged. 

Special  attention  has  been  devoted  to  the  inter- 
pretation of  society,  particularly  to  the  idea  found 
under  the  head  of  Sociation  ;  to  the  division  of 
Sociology ;  and  to  the  removal  of  the  confusion 
caused  by  burdening  the  subject  with  materials 
which  are  not  sociological,  but  belong  to  meta- 
physics, to  speculative  philosophy,  or  to  natural 
science. 

Three  classes  of  inquirers  were  prominently 
before  my  mind,  and  the  book  was  prepared  chiefly 
to  meet  their  needs. 


viii  PREFACE. 

First,  that  large  class  of  professional  men  and 
other  persons  of  culture  who  have  had  no  instruc- 
tion in  Sociology,  but  are  desirous  of  obtaining  an 
idea  of  its  nature  and  materials,  and  of  pursuing  its 
study  privately.  Even  if  they  cannot  become  spe- 
cialists, they  want  such  a  conception  of  the  subject 
as  will  enable  them  to  judge  of  its  sphere  and  prin- 
ciples, and  to  get  a  knowledge  of  its  trend  and 
literature.  The  practical  value  of  the  volume  will 
consist  in  bringing  society  definitely  before  their 
minds,  and  in  furnishing  the  means  for  fruitful 
sociological  investigations. 

Second,  students  who  have  no  Sociology  in  their 
collegiate  course,  but  realize  that  without  it  their 
education  and  their  preparation  for  life  are  incom- 
plete. This  Introduction  will,  it  is  hoped,  prevent 
the  waste  of  time  and  the  fruitless  efforts  which 
are  almost  unavoidable  if  the  study  is  taken  up 
without  some  help  to  its  definition,  its  division,  its 
relation  to  other  subjects,  its  method,  and  its 
literature. 

Third,  teachers  of  social  science  who  desire  a 
compend  as  the  basis  of  their  instruction,  or  who, 
while  lecturing  on  Sociology,  want  a  manual  in  the 
hands  of  their  students.  Such  a  volume  as  is  here 
offered  ought  to  make  more  easy  the  introduction 
of  tliis  study  into  institutions  where  it  is  now 
omitted.     I  expect  to  make  the  book  the  basis  of 


PREFACE.  ix 

my  introductory  lectures  to  sociological  students, 
and  have  had  this  purpose  in  view  in  writing  the 
volume. 

Teachers  and  students  who  use  the  book  are  of 
course  expected  to  exercise  the  same  independence 
respecting  its  contents  as  I  claim  for  myself.  It 
wants  to  lead  to  inquiry,  not  to  imitation ;  and  its 
purpose  will  best  be  accomplished  by  promoting 
investigation,  however  nmch  the  conclusions  may 
differ  from  those  here  presented.  Sociology  needs 
thinkers,  not  echoes. 

The  problem  to  be  solved  is  stated  at  the  begin- 
ning of  each  chapter.  By  thus  presenting  the 
theme  definitely  to  the  mind  of  the  student,  the 
discussion  is  likely  to  be  clearer  and  more  profit- 
able. 

The  smaller  print  is  intended  to  explain  and 
amplify  the  larger  which  it  follows.  Tlie  fact 
that  smaller  type  is  used  does  not  imply  inferior 
importance.  The  Reflections  are  for  review  and 
aids  to  original  research. 

During  a  residence  of  fourteen  years  in  Berlin  I 
found  in  the  Royal  Library  many  works  of  value 
to  the  sociologist  whose  contents  are  missed  by 
such  as  study  only  French  and  English  writers. 
Since  my  return  to  America  I  have  been  greatly 
indebted  to  Harvard  Library  and  the  Boston  Public 
Library  for  the  use  of  their  rich  treasures.     The 


PREFACE. 


books  mentioned  in  the  volume  will  suffice  to  intro- 
duce the  beginner  to  the  principal  works  and  also 
serve,  thi'ough  their  references  and  bibliography, 
to  open  the  way  to  the  extensive  sociological  litera- 


ture in  various  languages. 


Cambridge,  Mass. 

January  1,  1898. 


J.  H.  W.  STUCKENBERG. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.     The  Genesis  of  the  Idea  of  Society  ....  1 

II.     Definition  and  Scope  of  Sociology     ....  44 

A.  Definition 44 

B.  Scope 53 

III.  The  Relation  of   Sociology  to  Other  Social 

Disciplines 72 

The   General  Distinction  between  Soci- 
ology AND  the  Specific  Social  Sciences  75 

Political  Science 78 

Political  Economy 84 

History 88 

Other  Disciplines 93 

Is  Sociology  a   Grouping  of  Other  Dis- 
ciplines, OR  A  New  Discipline?      ...  97 

IV.  Division  of  Sociology 102 

V.     The  Principles  of  Society /jcr  se 115 

A.  Society 116 

The  Individual  and  Society  .     .     .     .  116 

sociation 126 

B.  The  Principles 143 

VI.    The  Historical  Evolution  of  the  Principles 

OF  Society 161 

VII.     Sociological  Ethics,  or  the  Progress  of  Society  201 

1.  The  Ethical  Ideal 216 

2.  The  Ethical  Actuality 220 

3.  The  Means  for  Realizing  the  Ideal 

of  Progress 221 

Completeness    of    the    Division    of   Soci- 
ology     233 


Xll  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

Vlll.     The  Method  in  the  Study  of  Sociology     .     .  238 
Method    for    Independent    Sociological 

Research 263 

IX.    Is  Sociology  a  Science  ? 272 

X.     The  Sociological  Study  of  the  Age  ....  295 

Plan  for  the  Study  of  a  Community  .     .  323 


Index 331 


INTRODUCTIO]^  TO  THE  STUDY  OF 
SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  Genesis  of  the  Idea  op  Society. 

The  Problem.  —  It  is  our  purpose  to  trace  hriefiy  the 
idea  of  society  as  developed  in  the  individual  and  in 
humanity.  Not  the  interpretation  of  society  is  our  aim, 
that  comes  later;  hut  a  general  conception  of  society. 
Even  persons  of  culture  rarely  apprehend  the  social 
totality. 

Antiquity  and  the  Middle  Ages  lacked  the  hroad  outlook 
and  the  intellectual  conditions  for  comprehending  the  total 
social  organism.  The  world  was  too  little  known,  and 
national  and  religious  life  severely  limited  the  conception 
of  the  nature  and  the  relations  of  society.  Greek  philos- 
ophy and  Christianity  enlarged  the  social  thought ;  hut  it 
was  reserved  for  modern  times  to  make  humanity  its  scope. 
Geographical  progress,  facility  of  communication,  travel, 
commerce  and  the  comprehension  of  the  world  as  a  mai^ket, 
the  growing  intimacy  in  national  relationship^  and  the 
general  enlargement  of  thought.,  have  given  prominence  to 
human  society  as  extending  heyond  church  and  state,  and 
hrought  the  different  races  into  close  contact.      The  mv.lti- 

1 


\-2{\'    IINTRO-DUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

plication  and  poiver  of  associations  also  gave  prominence 
to  social  thought  and  movement.  Society  hecame  too  im- 
portant for  thinkers  longer  to  neglect  its  interpretation. 
With  the  enlarged  conception  of  society  Sociology  was  horn. 
The  prohlem  prese7ited  in  this  chapter  is  introductory; 
it  leads  to,  but  not  into,  Sociology.  We  distinguish  be- 
tween the  genesis  and  the  interpretation  of  society  ;  but  the 
genesis  of  society  itself  is  the  condition  for  developing  the 
idea  of  society  in  the  individual  and  humanity ,  and  for 
constructing  a  complete  social  system. 

In  the  history  of  human  thought  the  conception  of 
society  in  its  most  comprehensive  sense  has  not  received 
due  attention.  The  conception  is  difficult  and  presup- 
poses various  preparatory  stages ;  it  also  seems  remote 
from  our  immediate  interests  and  ordinary  inquiries.  It 
is  significant  that  the  idea  of  society  is  not  more  fre- 
quently grasped  in  our  era  of  advanced  thought  and  en- 
larged views,  when  altruism  awakens  enthusiasm  and 
peculiar  prominence  is  given  to  social  studies. 

The  development  required  by  the  individual  in  order 
to  comprehend  society  is  an  interesting  study.  It  is  a 
process  similar  to  that  through  which  humanity  has 
passed  in  its  social  development.  The  evolution  of  man- 
kind has  frequently  been  compared  with  that  of  an  indi- 
vidual through  childhood,  youth,  and  manhood,  the 
genesis  of  thought  in  the  individual  being  similar  to  that 
in  the  race.  The  analogy  may  sometimes  be  strained, 
but  we  are  warranted  in  saying  that  as  the  individual 
unfolds,  his  processes  bear  a  likeness  to  those  through 
which  the  human  family  passed  on  its  way  to  civilization. 

Each  man  is  the  centre  of  his  universe  ;  from  that 
centre  he  draws  the  circumference  of  his  vision,  his  in- 
terests, and  his  activities.     Not  only  does  he  start  with 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.  3 

himself  wherever  his  thought,  feeling,  and  volition 
wander,  but  he  never  gets  away  from  himself.  How  to 
get  out  of  himself  is  no  more  a  problem  for  him  than 
liow  to  step  on  his  shoulders  ;  the  problem  is  how  to  en- 
large himself  to  the  comprehension  of  society  and  the 
universe,  and  how  to  relate  himself  consciously  as  he  is 
actually  but  unconsciously  related.  He  believes  a  false- 
hood if  he  imagines  himself  isolated ;  but  how  shall  he 
grasp  that  social  realism  in  which  he  is  involved  ? 

Absolute  social  dependence  is  no  more  characteristic 
of  childhood  than  is  the  total  unconsciousness  of  this 
dependence.  The  life  is  mainly  vegetative,  a  period  of 
potentiality  and  prophecy,  not  of  achievement.  The 
individual  himself  has  not  been  differentiated,  and  so  he 
cannot  differentiate  society  from  himself.  In  the  true 
sense  will,  reason,  character,  are  mere  possibilities  ;  the 
reality  has  yet  to  be  achieved.  The  child's  circumfer- 
ence is  limited  to  immediate  needs  and  their  supply. 

The  horizon  of  youth  is  enlarged  ;  a  dim  social  con- 
sciousness arises,  social  attachments  are  formed  ;  but  an 
imagined  independence,  wilfulness,  even  license  are  more 
dominant  traits  than  the  recognition  of  the  existing 
social  relation  and  social  dependence.  The  attention  is 
engaged  by  the  immediate  surroundings,  by  passion  and 
pleasure,  by  ambition  undisciplined  by  experience,  by 
iiright  hopes,  large  plans,  and  tentative  efforts.  Youth 
lacks  the  conditions  for  a  broad  outlook  into  humanity, 
except  perhaps  in  the  form  of  visions  and  aspirations. 
Unless  enthusiasm  inspires  the  heart  with  patriotic  and 
luimanitarian  sentiments,  the  family,  the  school,  a  narrow 
social  circle,  a  few  playmates  and  bosom  companions 
limit  the  sphere  of  the  social  interests.  Life  and  thought 
are  too  circumscribed  for  an  intelligent  conception  of  the 
meaning  of  human  society. 


4         INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

For  the  growth  beyond  a  self-centred  and  self-con- 
tained life,  we  look  to  the  years  of  maturity.  Yet  when 
manhood  and  womanhood  are  reached  personal  matters 
usually  become  so  absorbing  through  the  struggle  for 
existence  and  for  advancement  as  to  shut  out  the  consid- 
eration of  society,  except  so  far  as  in  our  immediate 
environment  and  as  a  necessity  or  pleasure.  When 
business  is  entered,  the  intensity  of  competition  and  the 
daily  cares  of  life  preclude  the  study  of  society  itself  and 
any  considerable  interest  in  its  general  welfare.  Tlirough 
the  press,  through  religious,  political,  and  economic 
considerations,  the  world  now  and  then  comes  into  view 
and  receives  passing  notice  ;  but  aside  from  private  in- 
terests, the  sphere  of  life  is  found  in  the  concerns  of  the 
community,  the  state,  the  nation,  and  of  the  church  and 
the  other  associations  to  which  the  individual  belongs. 
There  are  indeed  some  with  enlarged  social  views  and 
with  ardent  aspirations  for  humanity  ;  they  are,  however, 
exceptions,  and  mainly  confined  to  religious  and  philan- 
thropic efforts.  Modern  business  methods  afford  little 
opportunity  for  making  a  specialty  of  the  study  of 
society.^ 

We  naturally  look  to  the  educated,  and  to  such  as 
devote  their  lives  to  intellectual  pursuits,  for  that  com- 
prehensive and  intelligent  consideration  of  society  of 
which  we  speak.  It  is  society  itself  as  an  object  of  in- 
terest and  study,  in  order  that  it  may  be  thoroughly 
understood,  which  we  are  contemplating.  So  many 
things  are  involved  in  it  which  must  be  mastered  in  order 
that  social  affairs  may  be  comprehended,  that  a  high 

^  An  intelligent  business  man  was  asked  what  he  meant  by  society,  of 
which  he  was  speaking.  lie  answered  :  "  All  my  life  have  I  been  talking 
about  society,  and  it  seemed  perfectly  clear  tome  what  was  meant;  but 
now  that  you  ask  me  I  cannot  tell  what  society  ia."  His  experience  is  so 
common  as  to  be  nearly  universal. 


THE   GENESIS   OF   THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.  5 

degree  of  scholarship  aud  abstract  thinking  are  required 
for  a  successful  investigation  of  the  complexities  of 
association. 

With  rare  exceptions,  however,  the  educated  classes 
are  devoted  to  a  profession  or  calling  which  limits  the 
attention  to  a  particular  class  of  objects,  and  does  not 
lead  directly  to  a  contemplation  of  human  society.  The 
preacher,  the  teacher,  the  lawyer,  the  doctor,  are,  as  a 
rule,  too  exclusive  as  specialists  to  take  a  deep  and  broad 
view  of  humanity  ;  if  they  do  make  it  an  object  of  special 
inquiry,  it  is  apt  to  be  wholly  from  their  professional 
standpoint.  The  few  teachers  and  specialists  in  Soci- 
ology necessarily  concentrate  their  studies  on  social 
affairs.  There  are  others  also  who  transcend  the  limits 
of  their  profession  and  study  society  as  society  and  for 
the  sake  of  society.  Their  interest  is  theoretical  as  well 
as  practical ;  they  seek  to  interpret  society  and  to  pro- 
mote social  progress.  The  number  of  those  making  a 
specialty  of  social  studies  is  on  the  increase,  yet  even  in 
scholarly  circles  the  percentage  is  small ;  but  the  con- 
viction that  the  future  is  theirs  inspires  them  with 
enthusiasm. 

The  above  becomes  more  evident  when  we  emphasize 
the  oft-overlooked  distinction  between  society  and  soci- 
eties. The  latter  may  receive  much  attention  while  the 
former  is  neglected.  Every  thoughtful  man  considers 
the  societies  of  which  he  is  a  conscious  part ;  but  the 
social  organism  to  which  all  societies  belong  and  which 
is  the  social  totality  has  a  very  different  meaning.  Much 
that  characterizes  our  age  as  social  in  distinction  from 
what  is  individualistic  means  that  societies  rather  than 
individuals  are  considered ;  but  it  by  no  means  implies 
that  the  age  itself  has  grasped  the  idea  of  society  as  a 
totality. 


6  INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Each  one  contemplates  the  individual  when  he  thinks 
of  himself ;  so  each  one  considers  societies  when  he 
thinks  of  his  own  immediate  associations  ;  but  the  notion 
of  society  per  se  is  more  abstract.  Further  discussion, 
in  later  chapters,  will  add  to  its  clearness.  It  is  enough 
now  to  say  that  the  notion  does  not  refer  to  society 
here  or  there,  of  this  kind  or  that  kind,  but  to  the  essence 
of  society  itself,  what  constitutes  it,  and  what  is  found 
in  all  societies  after  what  is  peculiar  to  them  as  particular 
societies  has  been  eliminated.  The  difficulty  of  the  idea 
helps  us  to  understand  why  so  few  individuals  progress 
to  it,  and  why  it  is  so  rare  in  the  literature  of  humanity. 

Whoever  has  passed  through  the  egoistic  to  the  altru- 
istic view  and  attained  the  idea  of  society  itself,  can 
appreciate  the  struggles  through  which  men  as  they  now 
are,  and  as  they  were  in  past  ages,  must  pass  before 
attaining  the  same.  The  forces  which  control  individuals 
and  humanity  in  their  contemplations  can  be  inferred 
from  the  account  given  of  childhood,  youth,  and  man- 
hood. The  determining  factors  are  pressing  needs, 
personal  affairs,  self-interest,  what  satisfies  the  appetite 
and  gratifies  the  taste,  what  is  adapted  to  the  particular 
stage  of  culture  reached,  the  natural  and  social  environ- 
ment, the  profession  or  calling  in  life.  The  vast  majority 
consider  only  what  is  forced  on  their  attention  or  imme- 
diately concerns  them  ;  curiosity  may  lead  them  beyond 
this,  but  hardly  for  serious  contemplation.  Social  move- 
ments are  exciting  great  interest  and  societies  are  rising 
into  prominence  ;  but  there  arc  few  who  for  its  own  sake 
study  society  in  its  deepest  and  largest  sense. 

In  general  terms  we  can  indicate  the  process  of  such 
as  grasp  the  idea  of  society. 

It  requires  but  little  reflection  for  any  one  to  recognize 
the  society  in  which  he  moves  as  but  a  component  part  of 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.  7 

a  larger  social  totality.  The  family  to  which  he  belongs 
is  connected  with  other  families ;  the  organizations  he 
joins  touch,  influence,  and  are  influenced  by,  other 
organizations  ;  the  state  of  which  he  is  a  citizen  sustains 
international  relations ;  and  economic  organizations  are 
striving  to  make  the  world  itself  their  market.  Thus  far 
beyond  the  individual's  immediate  social  environment 
unions  and  organizations  are  recognized  ;  it  is  found  that 
men  are  not  isolated  but  exist  in  associations ;  and  it 
becomes  evident  that  individuals  can  be  understood  only 
when  studied  in  their  associated  capacity. 

Men  as  associated  furnish  the  most  general  notion  of 
society.  How  they  are  associated  and  what  the  results 
of  the  association,  are  subjects  for  further  reflection. 
At  first  the  individuals  in  the  association  are  the  most 
conspicuous,  and  many  are  so  absorbed  by  the  individuals 
as  not  to  be  able  to  do  justice  to  society.  This  difficulty 
can  in  part  be  overcome  by  considering  that  society  exists 
when  the  individual  is  born  ;  that  he  is  born  into  it  and 
is  constantly  subject  to  its  influence.  Heretofore  the 
tendency  has  been  to  pass  from  the  individual  to  the 
study  of  society ;  but  the  time  seems  to  be  at  hand  when 
the  individual  will  be  studied  in  the  society  of  which  he 
is  an  integral  part,  and  which  so  largely  determines  his 
character  and  career. 

The  individual  who  apprehends  society,  and  himself  as 
one  of  its  factors,  simply  apprehends  the  human  reality 
in  which  he  moves  and  of  which  he  is  a  part.  His  atten- 
tion is  naturally  first  arrested  by  what  is  nearest  him 
and  most  striking.  The  family,  the  church,  the  state, 
social  groups  in  which  he  lives,  great  voluntary  organi- 
zations, particularly  of  an  economic  character,  and 
popular  movements  which  carry  along  large  masses,  are 
proofs  of  the  reality  and  power  of  society.      But  aside 


8         INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

from  striking  social  phenomena  and  organized  bodies, 
there  is  a  deeper  and  subtler  meaning  of  society  which  is 
apt  to  escape  notice.  Men  are  united  by  invisible  ties 
and  controlled  by  unrecognized  social  forces ;  they  move 
in  a  social  mechanism  and  are  subject  to  social  influence 
even  when  alone.  They  breathe  the  social  air,  they 
imbibe  the  social  spirit,  they  live  in  a  social  environment. 
This  must  be  appreciated  if  the  individual  himself  and 
his  relations  are  to  be  understood.  Later  we  shall  see 
that  the  most  enlarged  view  of  society  is  attained  only 
by  one  who  recognizes  himself  as  an  integral  part  of 
mankind  as  a  totality. 

Since  the  process  in  the  individual  is  typical  of  that 
in  the  race,  the  development  described  helps  us  to 
interpret  the  evolution  of  the  conception  of  society  in 
humanity,  which  we  now  consider. 

The  social  actuality  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
full  consciousness  of  that  actuality  ;  in  other  words,  the 
origin  and  growth  of  human  association  are  different 
from  reflection  on  them  and  from  the  interpretation  of 
the  association.  We  must  remember  that  men  are  usu- 
ally unconscious  or  but  semi-conscious  of  what  concerns 
them,  that  facts  absorb  the  attention  long  before  their 
explanation  is  thought  of,  that  chronologically  practice 
precedes  theory  and  events  history,  and  that  thought 
must  be  matured  before  pliilosophy  and  science  become 
possible.  Social  processes  for  countless  ages  were  re- 
quired before  society  became  conscious  of  itself.  Indeed, 
though  we  are  growing  into  this  consciousness,  we  can- 
not yet  boast  of  its  full  attainment. 

The  evolution  of  society  was  the  condition  for  reflec- 
tion on  this  evolution.  Some  social  theory  is  of  course 
involved  even  in  the  earliest  social  forms,  and  some  oc- 
cult notion  of  the  social  relations  is  implied  in  all  social 


THE   GENESIS   OF   THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.  9 

action.  But  blind  impulse  and  unreflecting  instinct  pre- 
cede full  consciousness  and  rational  purpose.  Intellec- 
tual progress  consists  largely  in  developing  into  clear 
consciousness  the  actually  existing  but  unconscious  social 
elements  ;  what  is  implicit  is  gradually  made  explicit. 
There  is  thus  a  twofold  process  of  evolution,  —  the  con- 
sciousness of  men  respecting  what  exists  is  evolved,  and 
society  itself  is  evolved  so  that  new  elements  are  intro- 
duced into  consciousness. 

It  is  evident  that  a  long  process  of  development  was 
required  before  human  society  could  become  an  object 
of  special  inquiry.  How  long  no  one  can  tell,  for  the 
records  are  wanting  ;  and  for  the  same  reason  it  is  im- 
possible to  give  an  accurate  account  of  the  actual  social 
evolution.  From  the  traces  which  have  come  to  us  from 
prehistoric  times,  from  the  references  to  uncultured  peo- 
ples in  ancient  authors,  and  from  barbarians  of  the  pres- 
ent we  infer  that  the  state  of  nature  which  preceded 
civilization  was  far  removed  from  the  ideal  condition 
which  Rousseau  imagined.  The  individual  and  nature 
stood  face  to  face,  without  any  human  development,  and 
without  any  products  or  treasures  of  culture.  As  noth- 
ing had  been  done,  everything  had  to  be  done  from  the 
first  beginning.  Appetite  and  passion  ruled  ;  the  course 
of  life  was  determined  by  the  necessity  of  wresting  a 
livelihood  from  nature  and  warding  off  foes.  Associa- 
tion was  of  the  rudest  kind, —  often  an  aggregation  of 
brute  force  rather  than  association,  —  with  the  exercise 
of  such  forces  as  are  designated  savage  and  barbarian. 
Institutions  in  the  sense  of  definite  and  permanent  social 
factors  did  not  exist ;  the  family,  which  in  its  present 
form  is  itself  a  growth,  was  still  in  a  formative  stage, 
and  the  nucleus  of  all  organization  and  association.  At 
no  period  can  we  imagine  man  as  a  solitary  being ;  he 


10       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

must  have  been  a  member  of  a  family  at  least.  Neither 
the  natural  nor  the  social  conditions  were  such  as  to 
make  large  groups  possible  among  primitive  peoples. 
But  as  a  family  grew  it  developed  into  the  gens  and 
tribe,  with  some  patriarch  or  chief  at  the  head,  to  whom 
all  were  subject.^ 

Even  within  a  sphere  so  limited  and  a  life  extremely 
mouonotous  various  associations  were  possible,  —  as  for 
hunting  and  fishing,  for  grazing  and  agricultural  pur- 
poses, for  games  and  war.  It  was  association  in  an 
embryonic  stage,  and  mainly  within  the  limits  of  con- 
sanguinity. There  must  have  been  affection,  maternal 
at  least,  or  the  family  could  not  have  been  reared.  Curi- 
osity and  wonder  were  excited  by  the  objects  of  nature. 
That  the  fancy  was  active  is  proved  by  numerous  sym- 
bols and  superstitions.  There  was  generalization,  at- 
tributing to  many  objects  what  was  beheld  in  one,  but 
a  generalization  which  was  instinctive  rather  than  reflec- 
tive or  discriminative.  These  and  similar  conclusions 
are  reached  by  the  researches  of  ethnology  and  from  the 
study  of  barbarians  of  our  own  times. 

It  is  not  easy  to  conceive  in  the  crude  forms  of  the 
earliest  hordes   or   associations   the   seed   whence   the 

1  Such  a  solidarity  exists  in  certain  lower  stages  of  civilization  that  the 
notion  of  the  community  seems  to  be  much  more  prominent  than  that  of 
the  individual.  The  individual  is  simply  a  member  of  his  family  ;  his  in- 
terests are  identified  with  it ;  he  is  responsible  for  it,  as  it  is  for  him.  As 
one  of  a  mass,  he  does  not  stand  out  as  a  distinct  individuality.  Lazarus, 
"  Zeitschrift  fuer  Voclkerpsycliologie  und  Sprachwissenschaft,"  vol.  ii., 
p.  421,  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  a  Tamul  clan  designates  itself  by  the 
pronoun  "We,"  —  a  striking  evidence  of  their  consciousness  of  unity. 
When  the  property  became  private  instead  of  belonging  to  the  family  or 
community,  the  notion  of  individuality  received  more  distinct  recognition 
in  the  general  consciousness,  as  well  as  in  legal  enactments. 

The  article  of  Lazarus  referred  to  above  is  a  valuable  one  on  "  The 
Relation  of  the  Individual  to  Society."  Articles  by  the  same  in  vol.  iii. 
are  also  important.     The  social  student  will  liud  all  the  volumes  helpfuL 


THE   GENESIS  OF   THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.       11 

state  as  we  know  it  has  grown.  The  family,  the  gens, 
the  tribe  of  early  times,  constituted  the  primitive  state. 
Whether  the  tribe  grew  into  the  state,  or  whether  a  num- 
ber of  tribes,  forced  by  enemies,  formed  a  state,  it  might 
be  impossible  to  distinguish  sharply  between  a  chief  and 
a  king,  a  tribe  and  the  first  state.  Numbers  of  people,  a 
definite  territory,  and  an  improved  form  of  organization 
are  involved  in  the  idea  of  a  state ;  but  all  could  be  pro- 
duced by  a  gradual  process  of  development  from  the 
family. 

With  the  establishment  of  the  state  we  connect  the 
idea  of  a  more  settled  social  condition.  Thus  one  of  the 
most  potent  factors  for  social  development  was  given. 
Before  that  time  the  wandering  life,  whether  from  choice 
or  necessity,  and  the  unsettled  condition  of  authority, 
prevented  the  permanent  accumulation  of  the  means  and 
products  of  culture.  Then  the  rule  of  a  patriarch,  a  chief, 
a  priest,  or  medicine-man,  whoever  had  authority,  must 
have  been  through  age  or  strength,  —  a  rule  arbitrary  or 
determined  by  tradition  and  precedent,  or  by  customs  and 
traditions.  The  ruler  of  a  state  might  be  a  despot ;  but 
the  number  of  his  subjects  and  the  relation  to  outsiders 
imposed  restraints.  It  became  necessary  to  define  the 
nature  of  the  authority ;  laws  had  to  be  enacted,  and  the 
more  settled  condition  made  a  cumulative  process  of 
development  possible. 

A  higher  development  may  absorb  a  lower  form  and 
at  the  same  time  make  room  for  a  greater  variety  of 
social  groups.  When  the  tribe  or  tribes  became  a  state, 
many  lower  forms  of  association  might  continue  and 
new  societies  be  added.  The  family  continued ;  so  there 
was  room  for  spontaneous  gatherings  and  voluntary  as- 
sociations of  various  kinds.  What  belongs  to  humanity 
does    not    vanish    in    the    process    of    evolution,    but 


12       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

changes  its  forms.  Not  respecting  what  is  lowest  do 
men  differ  ;  it  is  alike  ,the  common  ^basis  on  which  all 
stand ;  the  differentiation  takes  place  respecting  what  is 
higher,  —  such  as  intellect  and  character.  Certain  asso- 
ciations may  be  deemed  natural,  belonging  to  all  stages 
of  culture  ;  others  can  arise  only  in  an  advanced  stage. 
Civilization  has  much  in  common  with  savages  and  bar- 
barians, but  it  likewise  has  much  which  is  impossible  for 
them.  After  the  state  was  formed,  there  was  as  much 
necessity  as  before  for  sustaining  life  and  propagathig 
the  species.  Not  so  much  in  what  it  eliminates  as  in 
what  it  refines  and  creates,  does  the  process  of  civiliza- 
tion consist. 

With  the  firm  establishment  of  the  state,  humanity 
enters  on  a  new  process  of  evolution,  in  which  we  are 
still  involved.  When  laws  were  made  and  recorded, 
they  became  a  factor  of  first  importance  in  connection 
with  the  traditions  and  customs  which  had  prevailed 
till  that  time.  The  laws  were  in  fact  a  culmination 
and  crystallization  of  what  had  been  regarded  as  becom- 
ing, sacred,  and  obligatory.  By  attributing  them  to 
some  divinity  their  authority,  as  well  as  their  perma- 
nence and  unchangeableness,  was  enhanced.  As  changes 
were  demanded,  they  could  be  made  by  means  of  inter- 
pretation, by  some  fiction,  or  by  actual  additions.  What 
existed  naturally  became  the  nucleus  around  wliicli  other 
laws  were  gathered. 

Probably  no  remains  of  the  past,  certainly  none  of 
the  earliest  historic  times,  are  more  important  than  the 
national  will  as  embodied  in  the  law.  Otlier  registers 
were  soon  added  to  those  containing  the  legal  enact- 
ments. A  record  of  the  most  important  events  of  the 
state  soon  became  necessary.  It  was  not  history  as 
we  understand  it;  that  came  much  later.     A  bare  fact 


THE   GENESIS   OF   THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       13 

was  recorded  or  a  mere  outline  of  events  given ;  per- 
haps it  was  in  the  form  of  picture  or  symbol,  some 
hieroglyphic  in  which  fact  and  fancy  are  indistinguish- 
able. The  monarch  and  those  associated  with  him 
were  the  usual  subjects :  diplomacy,  generals,  wars,  and 
conquests,  national  glorification,  religious  ceremonies, 
names,  dates,  deeds,  afterwards  annals  and  chronicles. 

Such  meagre  records  culminated  in  history  in  a  crude 
form  long  before  society  became  an  object  of  specific 
inquiry.  Much  of  antiquity  is  compressed  in  the  saying 
attributed  to  Caligula  :  •'  Kings  are  gods ;  the  people, 
cattle."  The  records  were  confined  to  persons  of  special 
prominence  and  to  deeds  deemed  by  them  significant. 
The  people  were  no  more  thought  worthy  of  historic 
remembrance  than  of  pyramids  for  their  remains. 
Glimpses  of  their  lives  are  at  times  caught,  but  they 
are  incidental  rather  than  intentional.  The  conditions 
for  appreciating  the  social  organism  were  lacking. 

In  the  record  of  what  was  regarded  important  we  see 
also  the  limit  of  serious  reflection.  The  prominence 
and  importance  of  the  state  made  it  an  object  of  special 
inquiry.  In  all  antiquity  we  look  to  Greece  for  rational 
investigation  into  the  nature  of  objects.  In  their  polit- 
ical and  ethical  writings  Plato  and  Aristotle  discuss  the 
state,  the  former  from  the  ideal  and  visionary,  the  latter 
from  the  realistic,  point  of  view.  The  omnipotence  of 
the  state  may  be  inferred  from  the  conduct  of  Socrates 
when  he  refuses  to  flee  from  an  unjust  sentence  and 
cheerfully  drinks  the  hemlock  to  vindicate  the  majesty 
of  the  law.  Political  science  still  strikes  its  roots  in 
that  era  of  Greek  thought  and  statesmanship.  The 
eminent  Greek  writers  refer  to  social  conditions  ;  but 
no  systematic  treatment  was  attempted.  The  state  was 
society  in  so  dominant  a  sense  as  to  exclude  all  social 
disciplines  except  politics. 


14       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  character  of  Greek  thought,  especially  from  the 
time  of  the  Sophists  and  Socrates,  was  pre-eminently  con- 
cerned with  human  affairs.  This  is  evident  from 
the  art  and  literature,  as  well  as  from  politics  and  phi- 
losophy. The  revival  of  the  study  of  Greek  letters 
always  means  a  revival  of  humanism.  But  the  con- 
cerns of  the  thinkers  were  human  nature  in  the  abstract, 
individuals  as  involved  in  social  relations  or  entangled 
in  social  meshes,  and  the  state,  in  which  the  individual 
was  largely  absorbed.  Society  as  distinct  from  the  state 
had  not  come  sufficiently  forward  to  attract  special 
attention.  Other  subjects  were  more  attractive  and 
more  urgently  required  development ;  the  world  was  too 
little  known  for  a  comprehensive  view  of  society ;  the 
particularism  which  prevailed  in  the  nations  interfered 
with  the  study  of  other  peoples  ;  and  the  exclusiveness 
of  the  prevailing  religions  also  limited  inquiry.  The 
Greek  states  were  usually  so  divided  as  to  make  even 
the  idea  of  nationality  very  contracted,  while  other 
peoples  were  treated  as  barbarians. 

Hebraism  was  dominated  by  national  and  religious 
particularism,  which  is  sometimes  broken  through  by 
the  universalism  of  some  prophetic  utterance.  In  the 
psalms  and  prophets  germs  of  a  large  conception  of 
humanity  are  found.  The  social  thought  of  Hebraism 
was,  however,  devoted  chiefly  to  Israel  and  the  neigh- 
boring nations.  The  purity  of  the  Hebrew  theocracy 
demanded  a  sharp  separation  from  the  Gentiles,  thus 
making  a  large  social  synthesis  impossible. 

We  know  not  what  social  thought  may  have  been 
buried  with  ancient  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylon,  Persia, 
and  other  nations ;  what  is  known  of  them,  however, 
leaves  no  doubt  that  they  were  far  behind  Greece  in 
that  respect.     The  speculative  mysticism  of  India  was 


THE   GENESIS  OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       15 

too  much  lost  in  the  gods  and  the  universe  and  eter- 
nity to  attach  its  philosophemes  to  human  society  as 
such.  Buddhism  had  the  humane  spirit  for  such  reflec- 
tions, but  it  was  too  intent  on  saving  the  individual  into 
Nirvana  to  stop  to  consider  his  social  relations  for 
their  own  sake  during  the  process  of  salvation.  Neither 
religion  nor  individualism  in  China  interfered  with  a 
study  of  the  social  realism;  but  the  broad  outlook 
beyond  the  state  was  wanting  for  an  enlarged  view, 
reverence  for  ancestors  made  traditionalism  rather  than 
progress  into  new  ideas  the  law,  and  the  precepts  of 
morality  applied  to  political  welfare  rather  than  to 
society  in  general.  The  entire  Orient  presented  con- 
ditions for  reflection  on  society  which  were  far  less 
favorable  than  those  in  Greece. 

As  we  approach  the  time  of  Christ  we  find  that  the 
progress  both  of  events  and  of  thought  broke  through 
the  prevalent  national  and  religious  particularism.  The 
conquests  of  Alexander  enlarged  the  views  of  men  by 
bringing  many  and  remote  peoples  into  contact  with  one 
another.  More  impressive  and  more  permanent,  how- 
ever, was  the  enlarged  conception  of  humanity  made  by 
Rome  as  a  world-power.  At  the  same  time  Greek  phil- 
osophers, particularly  the  Stoics,  discoursed  on  human- 
ity, on  the  brotherhood  of  man,  and  on  sympathy  for  all, 
regardless  of  nationality.  These  sentiments  were  echoed 
by  Roman  moralists  and  statesmen,  many  of  them  fol- 
lowers of  the  Stoics.  Then  came  Christianity  with  its 
doctrine  of  the  brotherhood  of  man  under  the  father- 
hood of  God,  with  the  demand  that  the  neighbor  be 
loved  as  self,  the  gospel  wiping  out  the  ordinary  social 
distinctions  of  heathendom,  exalting  humanity  by  its 
close  alliance  with  divinity,  giving  new  principles  and 
greater  unity  to  society,  enforcing  its  social  laws  with 


16       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

divine  authority,  and  spreading  its  new  social  teachings 
throughout  the  Roman  empire  and  even  beyond. 

The  enlarged  conception  of  mankind  included  such 
a  wealth  of  special  objects  that  their  appropriation 
rather  than  society  per  se  absorbed  the  studies  of  men. 
The  advance  in  social  study  was,  however,  marked.  The 
immediate  environment,  family,  race,  and  nationality  no 
longer  constituted  the  limits  of  thought.  Yet  so  far 
as  deeper  inquiry  was  concerned,  the  national  and  relig- 
ious points  of  view  long  prevailed.  The  Middle  Ages 
were  by  no  means  as  dark  as  is  usually  supposed ;  they 
had  intellectual  giants  not  a  few ;  but  the  objects  of 
special  interest  were  the  church  and  the  state,  theology, 
ecclesiasticism,  asceticism  ;  many  regarded  this  world  as 
so  exclusively  a  preparatory  stage  for  heaven  that  for 
its  own  sake  it  was  not  deemed  worthy  of  investigation. 
Not  so  much  for  itself  was  humanity  considered,  but  as 
lost  or  as  an  object  of  redemption.  Not  society  |jer  se 
was  studied,  but  three  institutions  received  constant 
recognition :    the  family,  the  church,  and  the  state. 

It  is  only  in  modern  times  that  we  find  the  external 
and  internal  conditions  for  the  study  of  society  in  the 
most  comprehensive  sense.  The  revival  of  learning,  the 
invention  of  printing,  and  the  discovery  of  America  were 
forerunners  of  the  new  era.  The  fetters  of  a  severe 
ecclesiasticism  were  broken  ;  theology  was  not  relegated 
to  the  past,  but  it  was  obliged  to  share  its  dominion  with 
philosophy  and  science ;  politics  and  economics  gained 
prominence,  and  put  into  the  foreground  the  state  and 
tlie  industries ;  the  introduction  of  the  factory  and 
steam,  especially  in  connection  with  the  development  of 
the  mighty  resources  of  the  New  World,  gave  an  un- 
paralleled impulse  to  secularism  ;  and  the  advance  of 
thought  developed  what  are  known  as  the  modern  ideas 


TUE*GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.        17 

of  human  rights.  These  rights  found  explosive  expres- 
sion in  the  American  and  French  revolutions,  and  then 
became  the  main  current  in  the  stream  of  human  prog- 
ress. The  people  came  to  the  front  as  distinct  from  tlie 
court,  the  nobility,  and  the  aristocracy.  Public  opinion 
was  formed  and  became  a  power  as  against  the  state 
hovering  over  the  people,  as  represented  in  a  Louis  XIY., 
who  said  :  "  I  am  the  state."  The  society  of  the  people 
attracted  attention,  and  thus  a  new  object  of  social 
interest  was  created.  The  very  sufferings  of  the  people 
in  contrast  with  the  few  privileged  ones  made  them 
objects  of  inquiry  as  well  as  of  sympathy ;  and  the 
efforts  at  relief  led  to  various  communistic  and  social- 
istic schemes,  particularly  in  France.  It  was  the  ear- 
nest practical  interest  in  society  at  the  close  of  the 
eighteenth  century  and  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
which  became  the  occasion  for  new  theories  of  society. 

This  growing  prominence  of  the  people  made  an  epoch 
in  human  thought  and  history.  Modern  history  teems 
with  crises  for  the  transfer  of  authority  from  the  one  to 
the  many.  From  two  centuries  of  social  ferment  the 
social  thought  now  so  dominant  has  emerged.  The 
common  people,  their  place  in  the  social  organism,  their 
relation  to  church  and  state,  their  claims  on  the  select 
few  deemed  superior  to  them,  their  needs  and  rights, 
now  became  objects  of  absorbing  study.  The  removal 
of  artificial  distinctions  gave  a  new  meaning  to  society, 
no  longer  confining  it  to  courts  and  the  nobility,  but 
including  all  members  of  the  community,  the  state,  and 
even  of  humanity.  The  importance  gained  by  society 
made  social  investigations  a  necessity.  Justice  to  it 
could  not  be  done  by  merely  discussing  the  church  and 
the  state.  It  became  manifest  that  these  were  largely 
dependent  on  popular  movements  and  voluntary  organi- 

2 


18       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

zations.  Society  gained  more  and  more  prominence  as 
an  object  of  thought  and  life,  and  that  alone  was  suffi- 
cient to  direct  intelligent  consideration  to  its  interpre- 
tation. 

It  is  in  the  progress  of  humanity  itself  that  we  see 
the  conditions  for  making  society  a  study,  not  merely 
societies.  Certain  currents  of  thought  tended  in  the 
same  direction  and  promoted  the  same  end.  A  number 
of  thinkers  reflected  on  humanity,  on  history,  on  law  in 
human  events,  on  progress,  all  bearing  on  society. 

While  in  the  Middle  Ages  society  in  a  general  sense 
had  not  attained  sufficient  prominence  to  make  it  an 
object  of  special  inquiry,  and  while  thought  was  ab- 
sorbed by  other  objects,  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that 
the  religious  view  is  in  itself  in  the  way  of  social  in- 
vestigation. The  character  of  Greek  thought  was  more 
favorable  to  such  investigation  than  that  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  yet  Greece  has  no  Sociology.  Human  develop- 
ment is  not  a  modern  idea ;  in  the  Middle  Ages  evolu- 
tion was,  however,  viewed  chiefly  as  a  divine  process, 
from  God,  in  God,  through  God,  to  God.  Even  from 
this  point  of  view  society  might  have  been  an  object  of 
specialization.  The  teleological  conception  of  the  times 
no  more  interferes  with  social  study  than  docs  the  fact 
that  man  acts  teleologically,  choosing  an  end  and  mov- 
ing toward  it.  If  God  is  believed  to  act  on  man,  and  if 
freedom  of  will  is  held,  that  need  not  prevent  the  study 
of  society  per  se.  Divine  and  voluntary  human  action 
enter  the  existing  process  of  nature,  conforming  to  es- 
tablished laws.  The  most  absurd  notion  and  the  most 
insane  view  do  not  interrupt  the  course  of  nature  ;  they 
come  to  naught,  but  they  conform  to  the  established 
order.  Whatever  choices  man  makes,  so  far  as  an 
effort  to  realize  them  is  concerned  the  action  must  be 


THE  GENESIS  OF  TUE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.        19 

adapted  to  the  working  of  existing  laws.  The  fact  is 
that  tlie  source  of  action,  divine  or  human,  does  not 
interfere  with  the  operation  of  law  in  humanity.  It 
could  interfere  only  if  the  problem  were  given  us  to 
solve  :  to  determine  all  human  action  as  caused  by  an 
unalterable  law  of  nature.  But  that  is  not  the  problem ; 
the  exact  cause  of  every  human  action  is  not  within 
reach.  Whether  that  action  is  caused  by  nature,  whether 
free,  or  whether  traced  to  a  divine  initiative,  it  is  all 
the  same  so  far  as  prevision  is  concerned.  Hence  it 
was  not  necessary  to  break  the  force  of  Christian 
thought,  unless  onesidedly  supermundane,  in  order  to 
recognize  law  in  humanity.  When  the  occasion  for  the 
scientific  study  of  society  was  given,  Christian  thinkers, 
as  well  as  others,  could  make  a  specialty  of  the  subject.^ 
Much  as  the  supernatural  view  dominated  the  thought 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  natural  was  not  wholly  ex- 
cluded.    Frequent  mention  is  made  of  nature,  and  by 

1  It  is  not  our  purpose  to  discuss  determinism  or  freedom  of  the  will ; 
but  the  error  that  freedom  would  overturn  nature  and  its  laws  ought  to 
be  exposed.  Human  freedom  is  not  held  as  an  omnipotent  power;  its 
limits  are  circumscribed.  If  the  initiative  is  free,  that  does  not  mean  that 
the  results  of  the  freedom  must  be  what  one  chooses.  A  free  choice 
would  operate  on  nature  exactly  as  would  a  necessitated  will.  The  laws 
of  nature  are  not  in  the  slightest  degree  affected  by  the  fact  that  they  are 
used  on  the  principles  of  determinism  or  of  freedom.  Hence  the  ab- 
surdity of  Dr.  A.  Riehl's  statement  ("Introduction  to  the  Theory  of 
Science  and  Metaphysics,"  p.  231):  "From  the  power  to  do  apparently 
unimportant  actions  with  absolute  freedom,  would  proceed  the  power  to 
reverse  the  course  of  nature  in  constantly  widening  circles.  A  single 
element  of  irrationality,  an  exceptional  event  that  is  uncaused,  must  in  its 
results  make  all  nature  irrational,  as  a  very  little  leaven  may  set  a  whole 
mass  of  organic  matter  in  fermentation."  A  will  free  in  the  use  of  the 
laws  of  nature  does  not  imply  the  slightest  interference  with  the  regu- 
larity of  nature's  laws.  When  Kiehl  adds:  "Nature  could  not  exist  with 
a  freedom  not  subject  to  law,"  the  only  answer  is  that  freedom  cannot  act 
on  nature  at  all  except  according  to  the  laws  of  nature.  It  is  a  perversion 
to  identify  freedom  in  the  use  of  nature's  laws  with  lawlessness. 


20       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

no  means  always  as  the  antithesis  or  enemy  of  God.  A 
number  of  thinkers  treat  nature  as  God's  handmaid,  as 
the  agency  through  which  He  works,  so  that  natural 
law  is  not  excluded  from  human  affairs,  but  regarded 
as  the  law  of  God.  TertuUian  and  others  held  that  in 
nature  we  have  a  witness  and  manifestation  of  God. 
Sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Duns  Scotus,  the  natural 
and  supernatural  were  not  only  held  to  be  in  perfect 
harmony,  but  the  former  was  supposed  to  include  the 
latter.  Then,  again,  the  two  were  sharply  separated. 
Scholasticism  had  its  rationalism  and  agnosticism,  as 
well  as  a  severe  orthodoxy,  and  these  affected  the 
theories  of  social  development. 

It  Avas  with  the  expiration  of  feudalism  that  modern 
society  was  born,  and  at  the  same  time  new  modes  of 
scholarly  investigation  were  adopted.  Instead  of  solv- 
ing the  great  problems  of  being  by  a  priori  decisions, 
the  heavens  and  earth  were  now  examined  directly,  in 
order  that  they  might  tell  their  own  story,  and  Bacon 
formulated  the  laws  which  the  leading  scientists  were 
already  following. 

Among  the  more  influential  impulses  in  modern  times 
toward  a  philosophy  of  society  we  must  look  to  students 
of  law.  From  the  law  that  prevailed  in  the  state  they 
passed  to  the  consideration  of  law  as  governing  hu- 
manity.i  Vico  (1668-1743)  wondered  why  there  should 
be  a  science  of  nature  and  not  of  history.  His  view  that 
God  rules  in  nature  and  in  nations  did  not  keep  him 
from  going  to  the  study  of  man  and  his  history  for  a 
knowledge  of  society  and  its  evolution.     As  is  usual  in 

1  It  has  been  claimed  that  the  notiou  of  the  prevalence  of  law  in 
nature  had  its  origin  in  the  idea  of  law  prevailing  in  the  state.  In  that 
case  tlie  idea  of  law  in  society  preceded  the  idea  of  law  in  nature.  This 
slionld  be  considered  by  those  who  seek  to  make  natural  law  the  norm  for 
society. 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.       21 

such  tentative  efforts,  there  were  many  fantastic  ele- 
ments ;  but  man  as  an  earthly  being  and  in  an  earthly 
environment  comes  into  the  foreground  ;  he  is  studied  in 
his  surroundings  and  in  his  history,  in  order  to  under- 
stand his  evolution  and  the  progress  of  civilization. 

Montesquieu  (1689-1755)  published  his  "  Esprit  dcs 
Lois "  in  1748,  a  work  combining  the  excellencies  of 
philosophic  thought  with  learned  research.  He  does  not 
develop  the  influence  of  climate  and  soil  on  man,  but 
distinctly  recognizes  it ;  he  rejects  the  interpretation  of 
human  affairs  by  means  of  dogmatic  presuppositions, 
and  goes  to  nations  and  their  history  for  a  knowledge  of 
their  laws,  and  searches  for  comprehensive  principles 
under  which  to  put  the  endless  variety  of  social  phe- 
nomena. 

It  would  be  an  endless  task  to  hunt  and  publish  the 
numerous  hints,  often  isolated  and  merely  tentative  sug- 
gestions, found  in  writers  since  the  sixteentli  century, 
which  are  preparatory  to  Sociology.  Materialism,  deism, 
and  rationalism  concentrated  the  attention  on  man  as 
the  determiner  of  his  own  destiny  and  subject  to  earthly 
influences.  As  nature,  government,  and  history  received 
especial  prominence  in  the  studies  of  scholars,  we  find 
man  in  his  associated  capacity,  according  to  his  environ- 
ment, development,  political  and  economic  relations, 
brought  more  and  more  into  prominence.  The  relation 
of  the  individual  to  society  ;  social  motives,  whether  in- 
terested or  disinterested ;  social  maxims  and  laws  ;  the 
ethical  principles  of  society  ;  the  economic  basis  of  so- 
ciety and  the  nations,  —  these  are  among  the  subjects 
which  meet  us  in  the  writers  on  law,  on  history,  on 
ethics,  and  on  philosophy.  In  France  we  have  Bossuet, 
Voltaire,  Quesnay,  Turgot,  Rousseau,  of  whom  Turgot 
deserves  especial  attention  for  his  views  on  human  prog- 


22       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ress,  some  of  which  anticipated  important  features  in 
Comte's  Sociology  ;  in  Germany  we  have  Leibnitz,  whose 
universal  genius  quickened  science,  philosophy,  and  the 
human  disciplines ;  and  in  England  we  have  a  long  list 
of  political,  ethical,  and  philosophical  thinkers,  from 
Hobbes  to  Bentham,  who  discussed  society,  tlie  social 
affections,  and  social  progress.  The  student  who  enters 
into  particulars  must  also  consider  the  influence  of  men 
like  Grotius,  who  sought  to  bring  nations  as  well  as  in- 
dividuals under  the  dominion  of  ethics,  by  the  establish- 
ment of  international  law. 

The  writers  named  and  many  others,  prove  that  the 
characteristic  ideas  of  Sociology  are  not  new,  but  the  re- 
sult of  a  long  process  of  evolution,  during  which  they 
became  more  distinct,  were  more  fully  developed,  and  so 
correlated  as  to  approach  a  system.  The  definite  ad- 
vance made  in  social  thinking  during  the  eighteenth 
and  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  consists  in 
this  :  society  itself  is  apprehended  and  made  a  specific 
object  of  thought ;  its  study  is  treated  as  a  separate  dis- 
cipline, just  as  politics  or  economics ;  consequently  the 
social  thoughts,  formerly  scattered,  are  now  concen- 
trated ;  they  are  developed,  are  augmented  by  the  study 
of  history,  of  ethnology,  of  institutions,  of  the  actual 
societies  of  the  present  in  their  various  stages  of  culture; 
and  the  result  of  the  total  inquiry  is  used  to  find  the 
principles,  the  laws,  and  the  system  of  society. 

There  is  one  writer  whose  thoughts  on  our  theme  de- 
serve notice,  yet  they  have  heretofore  been  too  much 
overlooked.  In  the  eminence  of  Schiller  as  a  poet  it  is 
forgotten  that  he  was  professor  of  history  in  Jena.  His 
inaugural  address,  in  1789,  was  on  the  subject,  "  What 
is  Universal  History  and  Why  is  it  Studied?"  In  his 
comprehensive  grasp  as  here  revealed,  as  well  as  in  his 


THE   GENESIS  OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       23 

ethical  and  gesthetic  views,  we  see  the  disciple  of  Kant. 
He  argues  in  favor  of  principles  as  the  rational  product 
of  details.  Man's  relation  to  nature  is  recognized  as 
affecting  his  progress  ;  among  the  advantages  of  the 
present  is  the  fact  that  he  has  subdued  nature  so  that  it 
ministers  to  his  highest  interests,  instead  of  being  his 
lord.  Tlie  discourse  is,  however,  historical,  and  shows 
that  we  are  the  product  of  the  entire  past  and  debtors  to 
all  by-gone  ages.  "  A  long  chain  of  events  reaches 
from  the  present  moment  to  the  beginning  of  the  human 
race,  which  events  are  interwoven  as  cause  and  effect." 
The  historian  of  universal  history  seizes  from  the  totality 
of  past  occurrences  those  which  have  most  deeply 
affected  the  present.  The  individual  must  regard  him- 
self as  connected  with  the  unalterable  laws  of  nature, 
with  the  entire  past,  and  as  a  member  of  the  whole  hu- 
man race.  "  All  preceding  ages,  without  knowing  or  in- 
tending it,  have  striven  to  usher  in  our  human  century. 
Ours  are  all  the  treasures  which  industry  and  genius, 
reason  and  experience,  have  at  last  brought  home  in  the 
long  ages  of  the  world."  As  we  are  under  such  great 
obligations  to  the  past,  whose  product  we  are,  we  ought 
to  pay  to  future  generations  that  debt  which  we  cannot 
possibly  pay  to  the  past. 

Far  more  important,  however,  is  a  work  whose  first 
part  appeared  in  1784,  the  fourth  in  1791,  while  the  fifth, 
which  was  to  have  completed  the  whole,  was  never  fin- 
ished. This  is  the  work  of  the  theologian,  preacher, 
poet,  philosopher,  and  historian  Herder,  entitled :  "  Ideas 
on  the  Philosophy  of  the  History  of  Humanity."  For 
its  own  sake  and  on  account  of  its  influence  it  is  worthy 
of  much  more  attention  than  it  can  receive  here.  Herder 
may  well  be  called  "  an  apostle  of  humanity,"  and  as 
such  he  is  a  representative  of  a  strong  trend  at  the  close 


24       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

of  the  eighteenth  century.  In  that  agitated  era  of  social 
fermentation,  of  human  rights,  of  liberty,  equality,  fra- 
ternity, of  American  Independence  and  French  Revolu- 
tion, of  communism  and  socialism,  there  was  a  strong 
tendency  on  the  part  of  scholars  to  comprehend  the 
whole  of  humanity,  man  as  extended  over  space  and 
moving  through  time,  within  the  sphere  of  scientific  in- 
quiry. Schiller  declared  that  to  the  philosophic  mind 
even  the  most  important  nation  is  but  a  fragment,  and 
that  in  such  a  mind  its  affairs  can  arouse  enthusiasm 
only  if  in  them  conditions  for  the  progress  of  the  entire 
race  are  seen. 

Herder  rises  above  his  contemporaries  in  the  effort  to 
enlarge  the  conception  of  man  so  as  to  include  the  whole 
of  mankind.  He  had  a  passion  for  humanity,  using 
"  humanity  "  both  in  the  sense  of  the  human  family  and 
of  a  humane  spirit.  Other  books  of  the  period  also 
aimed  at  the  interpretation  of  the  entire  race,  but 
Herder's  is  the  most  important  and  was  much  the  most 
influential.  It  was  mainly  due  to  the  impulse  given  by 
Herder  that  the  study  of  humanity  has  been  developed 
independently  in  Germany.  The  philosopher  Lotze 
bears  witness  to  the  influence  of  the  work  of  Herder. 
In  the  preface,  he  claims  for  his  "  Microcosm  "  that  it 
repeats,  "  with  the  changed  views  which  our  age  has 
gained,  the  undertaking  which  had  its  brilliant  beginning 
in  Herder's  Ideas  on  the  History  of  Humanity." 

Herder  states,  in  the  preface,  that  early  in  life  the 
thought  often  came  to  him  "  whether,  since  everything 
in  the  world  has  its  philosophy  and  science,  that  which 
most  of  all  concerns  us,  the  history  of  man  in  its  general 
features,  does  not  also  have  a  philosophy  and  a  science." 
This  early  problem  of  his  mind  he  now  attempts  to  solve. 
His  recognition  of  God  neither  interferes  with  the  uni- 


THE   GENESIS  OF   THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIErY.        25 

versal  prevalence  of  law,  nor  does  it  relieve  him,  through 
a  priori  presuppositions,  of  the  most  thorough  empirical 
investigation.  The  beginning  of  the  work  is  significant, 
and  shows  the  comprehensiveness  of  his  view.  The  first 
chapters  of  the  first  book  are  astronomical,  the  aim  being 
to  fix  the  place  of  the  earth  among  the  heavenly  bodies. 
"  The  earth  is  a  planet  among  planets  ;  it  is  a  planet  of 
medium  size  ;  it  passed  through  many  revolutions  before 
it  became  what  it  is  now."  These  are  the  first  subjects. 
Then  the  preparation  of  our  globe  for  the  various  kinds 
of  organizations  is  considered,  man  being  viewed  in  his 
relation  to  the  earth  and  plants  and  animals.  His  de- 
pendence is  shown  ;  his  evolution  depends  on  imitation 
and  exercise ;  culture  is  developed  by  means  of  human 
necessities  and  the  conflicts  with  nature ;  the  most  skil- 
ful become  the  leaders,  a  law  that  prevails  among  men 
and  animal  herds.  The  effect  produced  on  man  by  his 
relation  to  the  earth,  to  the  animals,  and  to  his  fellow- 
men,  is  a  common  theme.  Man  would  have  to  be  differ- 
ent if  other  metals  were  as  much  diffused  as  iron  is ; 
put  among  animals,  he  becomes  wild  like  his  companions ; 
he  is  a  man  among  men,  but  like  his  fellows  ;  "  accord- 
ing to  the  hands  in  which  he  falls,  so  is  he  moulded." 
Our  form  and  culture  are  the  product  of  eternal  laws, 
"  which  no  arbitrariness  of  man  can  change."  Amid  the 
endless  variety  of  life  on  earth  a  certain  uniformity  of 
structure,  a  cardinal  (typical)  form  seems  to  prevail. 
The  similarity  in  the  anatomy  of  land  animals  is  striking. 
The  inner  structure  of  the  rude  form  of  animals  is  very 
similar  to  that  of  man.  We  cannot  penetrate  the  mys- 
teries of  nature ;  but  the  transitions  from  one  form  to 
another  make  it  not  improbable  that  in  the  creatures 
dwelling  in  water,  in  plants,  and  that  even  in  inorganic 
substances,  there  is  one  and  the  same  capacity  for  organ- 


26       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ization  according  to  one  definite  plan.  "  We  find  that 
the  nearer  they  approach  man,  all  creatures  have,  so  far 
as  the  main  form  is  concerned,  more  or  less  likeness  to 
him,  and  that  nature,  with  that  infinite  variety  which  slie 
loves,  seems  to  have  constructed  all  life  on  our  earth 
according  to  one  fundamental  plasm  of  organization  " 
(naeh  einem  Haiiptplasma  der  Organization'). 

The  manifold  powers  in  beings  make  it  possible  for 
them  to  pass  through  transitions  and  to  assume  many 
divergent  forms.  Plants  that  grow  wild  in  nature  can 
be  made  objects  of  culture.  "  The  same  is  true  of  animals 
and  men  ;  for  every  race  of  men  organizes  itself,  in  its 
peculiar  zone,  according  to  the  manner  that  is  most 
natural."  On  mountains,  on  rocks,  in  heat  and  cold,  the 
same  plants  vary  greatly.  Can  it  be  different  with  men  ? 
The  diversity  of  earth  and  air  produces  varieties  (^Spiel- 
arten')  in  plants  as  in  animals  and  men.  According  to 
its  locality,  whether  it  be  in  the  sea  or  in  a  marsh,  in  a 
cold  or  hot  climate,  so  is  the  form  and  development  of 
the  plant ;  "  does  not  all  this  prepare  us  to  expect  of  the 
organic  structure  of  men,  so  far  as  we  are  plants,  the 
same  variations  ?  "  So  much  stress  does  he  lay  on  the 
influence  of  the  plants  and  animals  amid  which  man  is 
placed  that  he  regards  the  history  of  man's  culture  as 
largely  zoological  and  geographical,  and  he  expresses  the 
wish  that  a  general  botanical  geograi)hy  may  be  written 
for  the  history  of  humanity.  So  variable  is  man  that  he 
becomes  a  different  being  with  nearly  every  change  of 
climate.  Among  animals  variations  are  constantly 
occurring ;  and  according  to  the  analogy  of  nature,  it 
would  be  a  miracle  if  man  himself  did  not  change  with 
the  climates. 

Many  of  the  details  which  illustrate  the  above  make  it 
still  more  evident  how  familiar  certain  ideas  were  over  a 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       27 

century  ago  wliich  we  are  apt  to  regard  as  a  discovery  of 
our  own  times.  To  the  relation  of  man  to  the  earth  and 
climate,  to  plants  and  animals  in  general,  Herder  adds 
his  relation  to  the  ape.  "Within  and  without,  the 
orang-outang  is  similar  to  man.  Its  brain  has  the  same 
form  as  ours  ;  it  has  a  broad  chest,  Hat  shoulders,  a  face 
resembling  ours,  a  skull  like  our  own  ;  heart,  lungs,  liver, 
spleen,  stomach,  intestines,  are  like  those  in  man.  Tyson 
has  mentioned  forty-eight  points  in  respect  to  which  it 
resembles  our  race  more  than  it  docs  the  different  kinds 
of  apes ;  the  deeds  related  of  it,  even  its  follies  and  vices, 
make  it  similar  to  man." 

So  much  space  has  been  given  to  these  fundamental 
views  of  the  work  that  we  cannot  trace  his  ideas  of  the 
processes  of  man's  development.  This  development  is 
followed  through  all  climes  and  all  stages  of  culture.  It 
is  one  and  the  same  humanity,  but  its  course  is  trans- 
formation, its  history  is  a  ceaseless  metamorphosis. 
Nation  after  nation  passes  in  review,  each  with  its 
peculiarities,  its  degrees  of  culture,  its  institutions,  its 
contributions  to  human  progress.  What  is  antiquated  in 
one  period  may  have  been  a  blessing  at  another,  so  that 
adaptation  to  their  times  is  the  standard  for  judging 
objects.  The  fourth  part  brings  the  evolution  to  the 
close  of  the  Middle  Ages ;  the  fifth  was  to  have  treated 
of  modern  times,  with  a  discussion  of  the  spirit  of 
humanity  as  revealed  in  various  social  products,  a  con- 
sideration of  the  treasures  of  the  human  mind,  and  of 
man's  work  everywhere  and  on  everything,  and  with  an 
outlook  into  the  future.  But  only  a  meagre  outline  of 
this  fifth  part  is  given,  nothing  is  developed. 

The  conception  of  the  work  is  grand,  and  for  that 
time  such  a  book  is  remarkable.  Its  originality  the  re- 
search it  involves,  its  historic  data,  and   its  generaliza- 


28       jyTEODUCTlON  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

tions  reveal  the  diligent  investigator  and  philosophic 
thinker.  Herder  was  too  much  of  a  poet  not  to  give 
play  to  his  imagination  in  determining  man's  place  in  the 
universe,  and  in  making  all  science  and  philosophy  and 
history  minister  to  his  welfare.  Kant  after  reading  the 
first  part  criticised  the  soaring  imagination  of  the  author, 
and  hoped  he  would  restrain  his  lively  genius  in  the  parts 
that  were  to  follow.  Kant  gave  a  general  idea  of  a  plan 
for  the  same  subject.  He  regards  human  development 
as  a  process  of  the  unfolding  of  the  powers  of  man 
under  the  guidance  of  his  reason.  The  process  takes 
place  amid  the  conflicts  of  society,  which  are  the  condi- 
tion for  eventually  attaining  order.  The  greatest  prob- 
lem for  the  race,  whose  solution  is  forced  on  it  by  nature, 
is  the  attainment  of  a  general  civic  society  governed  by 
laws.  The  history  of  humanity  can  be  viewed  as  the 
accomplishment  of  a  hidden  plan  of  nature  in  order  to 
realize  a  perfect  political  state  as  the  only  condition  for 
the  complete  evolution  of  all  the  capacities  of  humanity. 
The  philosophic  attempt  to  construct  a  history  of  the 
Avorld  according  to  a  plan  of  nature,  which  attempt  aims 
at  the  perfect  civil  union  of  the  human  family,  must  be 
possible,  he  thought. 

The  movement  which  began  in  1784  might  be  traced 
down  to  our  own  time  through  numerous  German  works 
of  eminent  authors.  Especially  do  we  see  the  results  of 
this  movement  in  the  works  on  what  is  known  as  the 
"  history  of  culture."  We  must,  however,  come  to  the 
man  who  is  most  intimately  associated  with  the  name 
and  subject  of  Sociology,  —  Auguste  Comte. 

The  prominence  of  Comte  and  Ilerbei't  Spencer  in 
sociological  inquiries  entitles  them  to  especial  considera- 
tion in  a  history  of  the  subject.  But  their  works  are  too 
voluminous  for  adequate  treatment  in  an  introductory 


THE   GENESIS  OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       29 

volume ;  besides,  they  are  better  known  than  their  fore- 
runners, their  books  and  expositions  of  them  are  easily 
accessible,  and  every  student  who  wants  to  specialize  on 
social  subjects  must  go  to  their  writings.  Here  we  can- 
not hope  to  attempt  more  than  call  attention  to  some 
prominent  features  in  the  works  of  Comte,  and  make  a 
few  suggestions  on  the  study  of  this  author. 

The  beginner  is  not  prepared  to  form  an  estimate  of 
the  place  of  Comte  in  philosophic  thought ;  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  in  our  age  students  are  prepared  to  do  him 
justice.  He  must  be  judged  by  his  times  and  in  the  light 
of  the  work  of  his  contemporaries  and  predecessors. 
Thus  viewed,  there  can  be  no  question  that  ardent  ad- 
mirers have  given  him  credit  for  what  belongs  equally 
or  more  to  others.  He  sees  in  history  a  process  and 
progress  from  the  theological  to  the  metaphysical,  and 
finally  to  the  positive  stage  of  thought.  In  the  first 
stage,  the  explanation  of  things  is  found  in  gods,  in  the 
second,  in  entities,  forces,  causes,  which  are  imagined ; 
in  the  third  or  final  stage,  the  positive  or  scientific,  men 
reject  the  theological  and  metaphysical  explanations,  and 
go  directly  to  the  phenomena.  This  might  be  called  the 
empirical  method,  the  deeper  meaning  and  ultimate 
source  of  things  being  beyond  our  reach. 

The  succession  of  the  metaphysical  to  the  theological 
method,  and  then  of  the  positive  or  scientific  to  both, 
has  been  regarded  as  a  discovery  of  Comte  and  the  reve- 
lation of  an  important  historic  law.  It  is,  however,  not 
a  law  of  history.  Sometimes  one  method  is  dominant, 
then  another ;  but  all  may  prevail  at  the  same  time. 
The  theological  and  metaphysical  methods  do  not  ex- 
clude each  other  ;  throughout  the  Middle  Ages,  and  also 
since,  Christian  theology  is  largely  metaphysics,  the  doc- 
trine of  God  and  the  soul  being  no  less  ontolosical  than 


30       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

theological.  Instead  of  treating  one  method  as  wholly 
false  and  therefore  to  be  rejected,  it  seems  to  be  a  more 
rational  conception  of  history,  in  passing  from  one  stage 
of  evolution  to  another,  to  conserve  in  each  succeeding 
one  the  truth  of  the  old  and  developing  it,  while  reject- 
ing the  error.  If  the  first  stage  is  wholly  false,  hoAv  can 
it  lead  to  the  second  as  a  higher  stage  ;  and  how  can  the 
second,  if  likewise  wholly  false,  lead  to  the  absolute  trntli 
of  the  third  ?  May  not  the  main  eri-or  of  the  methods 
consist  in  their  exclusiveness,  each  claiming  to  be  abso- 
lute ?  Perhaps  the  positive  method  is  as  faulty  as  the 
others  in  claiming  absoluteness  and  universality,  and  the 
truth  will  be  promoted  by  limiting  it  to  its  proper  sphere. 
If  the  stages  have  any  merit,  they  ought  to  be  reduced  to 
two,  since  the  conception  of  theology  that  a  divine  being 
works  is  metaphysical ;  but  it  has  not  been  shown  that 
each  method  has  not  some  truth,  that  each  has  not  its 
place,  and  that  they  are  exclusive  but  not  complemental. 
Wild  speculation  at  the  beginning  of  the  century  led  to 
a  reaction ;  after  speculation  professed  to  be  able  to  do 
everything,  the  reaction  declared  it  could  do  nothing.  An 
extreme  produced  an  extreme,  and  the  phenomenalism 
which  resulted  is,  by  itself,  as  faulty  as  the  metaphysical 
speculation  had  been. 

The  supposed  law  of  progress  from  the  theological 
through  the  metaphysical  to  the  positive  stage  is,  how- 
ever, not  a  discovery  of  Comte.  Turgot  (1727-1781) 
gives  it  so  explicitly  that  it  is  unmistakable.  He  says, 
that  before  the  connection  between  ])hysical  effects  was 
recognized,  nothing  was  more  natural  than  to  ascribe 
them  to  intelligent  and  invisible  beings  resembling  our- 
selves. Various  events  had  their  gods,  and  to  them  they 
were  attributed.  "  When  the  philosophers  recognized 
the  absurdity  of  these  fables,  without,  however,  having 


THE   GENESIS  OF   THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.       31 

acquired  the  true  view  of  natural  history,  they  imagined 
that  they  were  explaining  the  causes  of  phenomena  by 
means  of  abstractions,  such  as  substances  and  powers, 
which  explained  nothing,  but  with  which  they  reasoned 
as  if  they  were  primary  beings,  new  divinities  substi- 
tuted for  the  old  ones.  It  was  not  until  later,  after 
observing  the  mechanical  action  of  bodies  on  one  another, 
that  other  hypotheses  were  drawn  from  mechanics,  as 
mathematics  was  developed  and  experience  verified." 
Here  we  have  the  supposed  law,  the  succession  of  the 
stages,  the  theological,  metaphysical,  positive,  the  very 
conceptions  given  by  Comte,  though  somewhat  elaborated 
by  him.  In  the  fourth  volume  of  his  "  Positive  Philos- 
ophy "  he  refers  to  Turgot,  but  does  not  attribute  the 
law  to  him.  It  is  not  likely  that  Comte  was  guilty  of 
plagiarism  ;  but  that,  with  his  much  reading,  he  should 
unconsciously  appropriate  such  a  law  is  very  probable. 
It  is,  however,  evident  that  its  first  statement  belongs 
not  to  Comte,  but  to  the  Minister  of  Finance  of 
Louis  XYI.i 

In  his  "  Biographical  History  of  Philosophy  "  G.  H. 
Lewes  says  :  "  The  foundation  of  a  comprehensive  method 
is  the  great  achievement  of  Comte,  as  it  was  of  Bacon, 
and  the  influence  he  has  exercised,  and  must  continue  to 
exercise,  will  be  almost  exclusively  in  that  direction." 
This  method  Comte  calls  the  positive,  in  distinction  from 
the  theological  and  metaphysical.     Applied  to  Sociology, 

1  For  the  facts  here  given,  for  the  original  of  the  quotation  from  Tur- 
got, and  for  a  discussion  of  tlie  whole  matter,  see  "  Auguste  Comte  und 
seine  Bedeutung  fiir  die  Entwickelung  der  8ocialwissenschaft,"  von  Dr. 
Ileinrich  Wantig,  Leipzig,  1894.  He  states  (p.  350)  that  among  the  fore- 
runners of  Comte  respecting  tlie  three  stages  of  development,  Twesten 
jiuts  the  Scotch  pliilosophers  and  likewi.^e  St.  Simon.  The  law  of  the.^e 
stages  is  found,  aliout  tlie  same  time  as  in  Comte,  in  Quetelet  and  Sophie 
(Jermain, 


32       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

it  simpl}'  means  that  the  science  of  society  is  to  be  treated 
like  physics,  that  the  aim  is  to  investigate  it  just  as  tlie 
other  natural  sciences,  and  to  give  it  the  same  positive- 
ness.  Comte  recognizes  the  peculiar  complexity  and 
difficulty  of  social  phenomena.  In  his  hierarchy  of  the 
sciences  he  puts  Sociology  last,  the  order  being :  mathe- 
matics, astronomy,  physics,  chemistry,  biology,  social 
physics  or  Sociology.  He  thinks  the  perfection  of  the 
positive  system  would  be  attained  if  all  phenomena  could 
be  represented  as  particular  aspects  of  a  single  general 
fact,  as  gravitation,  for  instance.  This  mathematical 
unity  he  seeks  everywhere,  and  he  frequently  becomes 
the  slave  of  his  own  rigid  system.  The  sciences  are 
arranged  according  to  their  abstract  and  general  charac- 
ter ;  what  is  most  universal  and  also  most  simple  is  appli- 
cable to  all  that  follows,  and  therefore  comes  first ;  then 
follow  the  more  specific  and  more  complex  sciences,  the 
culmination  being  reached  in  Sociology.  The  principle 
of  Comte's  classification  gives  a  conception  of  the  rela- 
tion of  the  sciences,  and  of  the  natural  order  of  their 
development  from  the  simple  and  general  to  the  complex 
and  specific.  His  own  discussion  of  these  sciences  aims 
at  principles  ;  in  distinction  from  the  specialist,  he  seeks 
their  bonds  of  union,  a  philosophy  of  the  sciences.  It 
is  not  strange  that,  with  such  a  general  view  as  his, 
specialists  surpassed  him  in  knowledge  in  their  specific 
departments.  Much  that  he  wrote  has  now  only  historic 
interest.  Our  main  concern  is  with  the  scheme  as  a 
whole.  The  lack  of  psychology  in  the  hierarchy  has 
fi-cquently  been  observed.  He  made  it  a  part  of  biology, 
and  even  treated  it  from  the  standjjoint  of  phrenology, 
though  he  did  not  go  to  the  extreme  of  some  of  Dr. 
Gall's  followers. 

IJut  the  main  difficulty  in  his  hierarchy  of  the  seioncea 


THE   GENESIS  OF  THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.       83 

is  that  it  has  no  foundation  ;  it  hangs  in  the  air.  Facts 
are  to  be  observed,  theories  are  to  be  drawn  from  them, 
and  the  laws  in  the  sequence  of  events  are  to  be  discov- 
ered ;  but  the  basis  for  these  operations,  their  interpreta- 
tion and  justification,  are  wanting.  Introspection,  the 
direct  observation  of  intellectual  processes,  and  the  ordi- 
nary method  of  psychologists,  are  discouraged.  It  looks 
as  if  Comte  had  a  notion  that  somehow^  the  mind  can  get 
out  of  itself,  and  in  this  way  study  what  is  going  on  within- 
He  has  no  critical  theory  of  knowledge  ;  to  this,  much  of 
the  confusion  in  his  works  may  be  attributed.  At  one 
time  he  wants  to  subject  all  human  affairs  to  natural 
law  ;  then  he  finds  peculiarities  in  man  which  require 
especial  emphasis.  Now  everything  is  to  be  strictly 
scientific ;  then  he  lays  great  stress  on  morals  and 
rehgion,  making  humanity  or  its  great  heroes  the  object 
of  faith  and  worship,  and  modelling  the  hierarchy  of  his 
church  after  that  of  Catholicism.  The  claims  of  the  heart 
are  not  met  by  what  he  terms  positive ;  and  when  he  es- 
tablishes institutions  which  are  to  satisfy  the  heart  there 
is  a  direct  conflict  with  the  positive  elements.  What- 
ever the  logic  of  his  sensationalism  may  be,  there  are 
parts  of  his  system  which  demonstrate  practically  that 
he  recognized  the  need  of  faith,  and  that  he  gave  the 
rein  to  imagination  and  poetry.  But  this  is  in  spite  of 
his  positivism.  He  seems  to  have  been  helpless  in  the 
matter.  But  aside  from  this  yielding  to  the  impulses 
of  his  heart,  taking  his  theoretical  views,  we  regard  liim 
as  a  type  of  that  school  which  usqs,  without  criticism,  the 
mental  faculties,  which  substitutes  supposed  objective 
knowledge  for  what  is  really  sulijective,  which  subordi- 
nates reason  to  sensation,  which  claims  for  science  what 
is  mere  opinion,  which  denounces  theology  and  meta- 
physics, and  then  (unconsciously  perhaps)  puts  its  own 

3 


34        INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

theology  and  metaphjsic  iu  their  place.  Things  arc 
eliminated,  and  phenomena  alone  are  left;  yet  the  phe- 
nomena are  treated  as  if  they  were  entities.  We  are 
expected  to  experiment  with  nature ;  but  we  cannot  ex- 
periment with  mere  phenomena.  This  school,  by  means 
of  this  experiment,  wants  to  get  nature  to  tell  us  all  it 
can,  that  we  may  learn  its  secrets ;  why  not  treat  the 
mind  in  the  same  way,  imagination,  reason,  aspiration, 
faith  being  regarded  -as  but  so  many  revelations  of  its 
character  ?  But  this  is  disparaged  as  a  departure  from 
reality!  Sensation  is  the  supreme  test;  yet  a  Kepler 
needed  imagination  to  discover  his  laws,  Newton  may 
have  found  it  as  serviceable  as  Milton,  and  it  is  involved 
in  every  scientific  thcor}' .  Reason  seems  to  be  feared 
as  metaphysical.  We  find  that  even  culture  is  depre- 
ciated ;  it  is  a  departure  from  nature.  The  study  of 
thought  by  thought  is  also  a  departure  from  reality. 
Many  members  of  this  school  surpass  Comte  in  sensa- 
tional consistency.  They  want  nature  to  dominate 
mind.  Sense  is  exalted  as  if  it  could  pick  up  science 
without  an  appeal  to  thought ;  faith  is  ridiculed,  but  only 
because  it  is  not  known  that  all  our  science  depends  on 
faith,  —  namely,  on  the  belief  that  our  faculties  do  not 
deceive  us.  It  is  easy  to  make  the  objective  world  the 
law  of  our  minds  so  long  as  it  is  not  known  that  what 
we  call  the  objective  world  is  simply  our  mental  conce])- 
tion  of  it.  Our  views  are  ours  because  they  are  in  our 
minds  ;  all  terms  that  we  use,  no  matter  what  the  ob- 
jects to  which  they  refer,  are  mental,  and  never  can  be 
anything  else. 

Comte  occupies  essentially  the  position  of  that  dog- 
matism which  Kant  tried  to  anniliilate.  Kant  rejected 
the  theological  method  of  research  as  completely  as 
Comte  ;  he  regarded  the  noumona  as  beyond  our  scien- 


THE    GENESIS   OF   THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.        35 

tific  apprehension,  and  thought  that  we  are  limited  to 
phenomena ;  so  that  the  old  basis  is  taken  away  from 
metaphysics.  What  is  lauded  as  Comtc's  method  is  as  "^ 
much  Kant's ;  but  Kant  respected  the  reason  he  criticised, 
he  left  room  for  faith  where  science  could  not  tread,  and 
(because  he  recognized  our  limitation  to  phenomena)  he 
refused  to  assert  that  man  is  to  be  interpreted  just  as  the 
plant  and  the  animal.  Kant's  scheme  for  the  study  of 
humanity  as  emphatically  as  Comte's  rejects  theological 
and  metaphysical  theories  ;  but  while  it  wants  man  to  be 
studied  as  he  is,  strictly  according  to  the  scientific  method, 
he  does  not  profess  to  be  able  to  determine  that  all  of 
man  can  be  made  absolutely  scientific  in  the  technical 
sense,  and  that  the  science  of  society  is  to  be  reduced  to 
a  physical  science.  Kant  was  the  stanchest  advocate 
of  the  freedom  of  will  ;  but  that  did  not  interfere  with 
his  insistence  on  law  in  human  affairs. 

By  attributing  to  Comte  excellencies  without  discrim- 
ination, students  are  misled  ;  it  is  a  recommendation  of 
his  faults  with  his  real  deserts.  The  neglect  to  which 
he  was  suliject  in  France  cannot  be  ascribed  solely  to 
the  fact  that  he  was  in  advance  of  his  age  ;  in  respect  to 
the  criticism  of  the  mind  he  was  far  behind  the  true  dis- 
ciples of  Kant.  Whatever  extreme  Catholics  of  France 
may  have  claimed  inspecting  society,  the  Encyclopedists 
certainly  had  no  theological  prepossessions,  the  sensa- 
tional French  philosophy  was  not  metaphysical,  and  in 
Protestant  countries  human  affairs  generally  were  inves- 
tigated in  the  scientific  spirit  by  eminent  thinkers. 

We  do  not  dwell  here  on  the  strange  views  scattered 
throughout  liis  works,  palpable  errors  being  mixed  with 
profound  truths.  The  latter  part  of  his  life  looks  like 
mental  aberration.  Lewes  says  :  "  Over  his  subsequent 
efforts  to  found  a  social  doctrine,  and  to  become  the 


36        INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY   OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

founder  of  a  new  religion,  let  us  draw  the  veil."     Even 
his  earlier  works  abound  in  vagaries. 

While  it  is  a  duty  to  guard  against  Comte's  errors,  it 

is  equally  a  duty  to  give  him  credit  where  due.     This  is 

great,  though  we  cannot  find  it  in  his  stages  of  human 

[     progress  or  in  originality  of  method.    But  he  developed 

I     the  method  of  social  inquiry  and  applied  it  more  fully 

than  his  predecessors.     Never  before  did  a  thinker  so 

concentrate  all  his   energies   on   the   interpretation   of 

society.     The   term  "  social  science "  was  in   common 

f    use.     The  invention  of  the  term  "  Sociology,"  however, 

I     is  to  his  credit,  as  Avell  as  the  word  "  altruism." 

Comte  is  by  no  means  always  a  profound  and  consistent 
thinker,  but  he  is  suggestive  and  comprehensive,  intent 
on  working  in  new  mines  of  thought,  and  his  place  is 
unique  and  prominent.  He  made  Sociology  a  distinct 
object  of  human  thought,  tried  to  establish  its  place 
among  the  other  disciplines  and  to  correlate  it  to  them, 
concentrated  the  light,  from  whatever  quarter  tlie  rays 
might  emanate,  on  its  nature  and  method,  and  gave  a 
strong  impulse  toward  those  social  studies  which  have 
now  become  so  absorbing.  Whether  many  or  any  of  his 
conclusions  shall  abide,  his  relation  to  Sociology  is,  and 
always  will  be,  a  peculiar  one.  Even  though  others 
share  with  him  the  credit  of  having  given  the  start  to 
this  discipline,  his  place  is  one  of  special  eminence.  We 
can  almost  speak  of  the  dominance  he  gave  to  the  social 
point  of  view  as  epoch-making. 

Nothing  was  completed  by  Comte,  but  Sociology  was 
fairly  started.  Even  down  to  the  present  we  can  hardly 
speak  of  more  than  tentative  efforts  to  fix  the  subject,  to 
determine  its  method,  to  collect  the  materials  it  includes, 
and  to  form  them  into  a  valid  and  consistent  system. 
We  cannot  here  follow  the  history  of  our  subject  any 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       37 

further ;  nor  is  it  necessary,  since  its  data  are  within 
easy  reach  of  the  student.  Eminent  sociological  special- 
ists since  Comte  are  still  living  ;  in  some  instances  their 
works  are  not  yet  completed,  and  in  all  cases  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  we  have  the  perspective  for  a  fair  estimate 
of  their  labors. 

The  genesis  of  Comte's  Sociology  must  not  be  con- 
founded with  the  genesis  of  Sociology  itself.  Tiiat  would 
be  making  Comte  the  norm  for  sociological  thinking. 
The  same  rule  applies  to  Spencer  and  later  sociologists. 
Just  as  the  history  of  society  does  not  construct  the 
system  of  society,  so  the  history  of  Sociology  does  not 
give  the  final  Sociology.  But  this  history  gives  valuable 
hints  for  future  methods,  conclusions  to  be  tested,  mate- 
rials to  be  sifted,  germs  to  be  developed.  There  have 
been  numerous  sociological  architects.  They  have  reared 
no  enduring  structure  ;  it  is  doubtful  even  how  far  they 
have  laid  an  abiding  foundation  and  drawn  a  plan  avail- 
able for  future  builders.  We  can  hardly  claim  that  more 
than  a  scaffolding  has  been  erected;  and  even  on  this 
scaffolding  the  workers  cannot  agree  to  stand  together 
and  labor  co-operatively  on  the  same  structure. 

The  evolution  of  the  idea  of  society  and  tlien  of  Sociology,  in  the 
individual  mind  and  in  humanity,  is  an  interesting  and  important 
theme.  In  the  process  of  this  evolution  three  objects  come  defi- 
nitely before  the  mind  :  the  individual ;  the  various  societies,  such 
as  social  gi'oups,  organizations,  tlie  church,  the  state;  and  society  as 
inclusive  of  all  societies.  Those  who  miss  the  last,  the  idea  o'f 
society  per  se,  fail  to  complete  the  evolution  and  cannot  construct 
a  comprehensive  social  system. 

The  individual  cannot  be  understood  if  considered  ])y  himself. 
He  sustains  social  relations  and  in  these  must  be  studied.  Neither 
can  an  association  be  understood  if  isolated ;  it  must  be  studied  in 
connection  with  all  the  other  associations  to  which  it  is  related  and 
whose  influence  it  experiences.      This  is  merely  saying  that  indi- 


433G45 


38       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

viduals  and  associations  must  be  taken  as  tliey  really  are  ;  fictitious 
separations  give  fictitious  results.    Societies  ought  to  be  considered  , 
in  the  totality  of  their  interrelations  and  interactions.    This  means 
that  societies  must  be  ap^jrehended  as  forming  a  totality,  and  that 
they  must  be  studied  in  this  totality. 

Societies  themselves  may  be  organized  selfishness,  intent  on  their 
own  concerns  to  the  exclusion  of  other  interests.  Societies  may 
therefore  be  a  barrier  in  the  way  of  the  apprehension  of  society  as 
a  totality.  Concentrated  around  narrow  self-interest,  formed  for 
competition  or  antagonism,  they  fail  to  recognize  the  organism  of 
which  they  are  but  a  part,  and  so  limit  their  vision  as  to  miss  the 
view  of  humanity.  A  society  is  called  a  parly  because  it  is  but  a 
part  of  the  whole  ;  yet  it  is  in  constant  danger  of  usurping  the  place 
of  the  totality,  of  which  it  may  be  an  insignificant  fraction.  Family 
affectiou  and  patriotism  are  often  synonymes  of  narrowness.  Is 
not  the  history  of  states  a  revelation  of  self-seeking,  of  diplomacy 
guided  by  selfish  cunning,  of  Machiavellian  principles  in  practice? 
Even  international  law  is  not  the  fruit  of  national  generosity.  But 
if  a  people  limits  its  appreciation  to  its  selfish  interests,  not  even 
including  other  existing  nations  as  objects  of  impartial  study,  how 
can  it  be  expected  to  concern  itself  about  humanity  in  all  ages  of 
the  world  ? 

The  difficulty  of  the  individual  and  of  societies  in  attaining  the 
largest  social  view  will  enable  lis  to  appreciate  the  long  struggle 
necessary  in  humanity  before  the  idea  of  society  conld  be  grasped 
and  made  a  permanent  possession  of  mankind.  Until  recently  the 
conditions  and  interests  were  such  that  the  idea  of  society  could 
not  be  seized ;  because  individuals  and  societies  were  everything, 
society  per  se  was  not  thought  of.  But  since  the  revival  of  human- 
ism, the  dissolution  of  feudalism,  the  discovery  of  a  new  continent, 
the  travels  and  commerce  among  all  peoples,  the  increase  of  free- 
dom in  church  and  state,  and  the  growth  of  voluntary  associations, 
both  thought  and  society  would  have  to  be  checked  not  to  evolve 
the  notion  of  the  social  totality. 

All  history  bears  testimony  to  the  limited  social  interests,  and 
therefore  also  to  the  limit  of  social  studies,  in  the  past.  The  dom- 
inant ideas  have  been  individualistic,  or  of  the  family,  the  tribe, 
the  state  and  nation,  religion,  economic  affairs ;  the  dominance  of 
the  social  idea  as  inclusive  of  all  societies  is  beginning,  but  its 
complete  and  general  victory  still  belongs  to  the  future.    The  social 


THE   GENESIS  OF   THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       39 

study  of  history  is  a  study  of  the  limitation  to  which  social  thought 
has  been  subject. 

However  much  the  Greek  intellect  rose  above  the  orientalism 
which  preceded  it,  its  standpoint  for  contemplating  humanity  re- 
mained Greek.  The  Roman  standpoint  was  jm-idical  and  political 
rather  than  social.  The  larger  view  of  a  few  philosophers  and  moral- 
ists both  in  Greece  and  Home  led  to  no  study  of  society  itself.  The 
Christian  view  of  Immauity  was  religious  and  was  intended  to  be 
so.  The  Middle  Ages,  middle  because  a  bridge  or  transition  from 
ancient  to  modern  times,  have  been  studied  too  exclusively 
from  the  religious  and  political  points  of  view  to  bring  out  their 
social  thoughts.  Not  only  the  Christian  doctrine,  but  likewise 
Greek  philosophy,  especially  that  of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  was  used 
to  transform  the  old  views  of  man  and  nature,  often  with  results 
confusing  and  contradictory.  The  only  society  for  depraved  man 
which  was  deemed  worthy  of  special  inquiry  was  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  was  interpreted  to  mean  the  church,  and  the  state  as 
intimately  connected  with  the  church.  Nature  was  regarded  as  a 
manifestation  of  God,  natural  law  as  divine  law ;  but  at  times  the 
world  was  represented  as  antagonistic  to  God.  Sometimes  matter 
itself  seemed  to  be  the  embodiment  of  evil,  at  others  the  world 
meant  sinful  men.  Near  the  days  of  the  apostles,  we  find  in  the 
First  Epistle  of  Clement  a  chapter  on  the  peace  and  harmony  of 
the  universe,  the  working  of  nature  being  regarded  as  but  a  manifes- 
tation of  divine  power  and  goodness  ;  but  in  the  Second  Epistle  one 
chapter  teaches  that  this  world  is  to  be  despised,  and  another  that 
the  present  and  future  worlds  are  at  enmity.  There  is,  however, 
a  universalism  in  medifcval  Christianity  which  fi-ees  the  individual 
from  the  ordinary  limitations  of  family,  occupation,  nation,  and 
race,  and  promotes  the  idea  of  the  unity  of  humanity. 

For  the  development  of  the  ideas  which  have  prepared  the  way 
for  Sociology  works  on  the  philosophy  of  history  are  valuable.  See 
especially  R.  Flint,  "  Philosophy  of  History,"  France  and  Germany ; 
and  a  later  volume,  with  the  same  title,  on  France  alone,  with  a 
long  general  introduction.  The  impulse  given  to  the  study  of 
history  and  literature  from  the  social  point  of  view  is  bringing  to 
light  many  references  to  society  heretofore  overlooked. 

The  modern  evolution  which  has  made  the  idea  of  society 
possible,  we  might  almost  say  inevitable,  has  aLso  added  to  its  diffi- 
culty.    Originally  the  mass  was  far  more  distinct  than  the  indi- 


40       INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

vidual ;  he  was  merged  in  the  family,  the  horde,  or  the  tribe,  even 
property  being  common.  Progress  meant  individualization ;  the 
individual  became  more  himself,  less  an  indistinguishable  part  of 
the  aggregate.  Property  became  private  and  the  possessor  of  it  an 
object  of  legal  enactments.  Modern  culture,  with  the  results  of 
thousands  of  years  of  differentiation,  presents  individual  and 
social  diversity  in  place  of  the  primitive  monotony.  In  the  dis- 
tinctness of  the  individuals,  in  the  variety  of  their  interests,  in  the 
endless  diversity  of  societies,  in  the  richness  and  distraction  of 
modern  life,  it  is  difficult  to  apprehend  the  underlying  unity.  The 
social  wealth  of  the  present  promises  to  inaugurate  the  new  social 
era  ;  but  this  very  wealth  requires  a  larger  view  than  in  the  past 
for  the  comprehension  of  society. 

The  last  three  or  fou.r  centuries  are  especially  important  for  the 
development  of  the  sociological  idea,  the  evolution  being  cumula- 
tive until  Sociology  itself  is  clearly  enunciated.  A  few  more  hints 
are  given  respecting  some  modern  writers,  together  with  references 
to  sociological  literature. 

Of  Grotius  (1583-164.5)  the  "  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  "  says 
he  held  "  that  the  law  of  nature  is  unalterable  ;  God  Himself  can- 
not alter  it,  any  more  than  lie  can  alter  a  mathematical  axiom.  ' 
This  law  has  its  source  in  man  as  a  social  being  ;  it  would  be  valid 
even  if  there  were  no  God,  or  if  God  did  not  interfere  in  the 
government  of  the  world.  These  positions,  though  Grotius'  reli- 
gious temper  did  not  allow  him  to  rely  unreservedly  upon  them, 
yet,  even  in  the  partial  application  they  find  in  his  book,  entitle 
him  to  the  honor  of  being  held  the  founder  of  the  modern  science 
of  the  law  of  nature  and  of  nations." 

The  views  of  Vice  appeared  in  1725,  in  a  volume  entitled 
"  Principi  d'  una  scienza  nuova  d'  interno  alia  commune  natura  delle 
nazioni."     For  his  views  see  "  Vico,"  by  R.  Flint. 

In  Montescpiieu's  "  Spirit  of  Laws,"  the  beginning  and  books 
XIV.-XVIII.  are  most  valuable.  He  regards  laws  as  indicating 
the  relations  which  arise  from  the  nature  of  things.  In  this  gen- 
eral sense  all  beings  ai-e  subject  to  law.  Man  is  formed  for  society. 
By  means  of  civil  laws  legislators  have  sought  to  remind  him  of 
his  duties  to  his  fellow-men.  These  laws  are  to  take  into  account 
not  merely  the  people  who  are  to  be  governed,  but  also  tlie  cli- 
mate, the  soil,  the  location  and  extent  of  the  country.  IVIontes- 
quieu  distinctly  recognizes  in  man's  relation  to  nature  an  essential 
element  of  social  phenomena. 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA    OF  SOCIETY.       41 

The  original  title  of  Schiller's  inaugural  address  is  :  "  Was  heisst 
und  zu  welchem  Ende  studirt  man  Universalgeschichte  ?  " 

Kant's  discussion  of  society  is  contained  in  a  tractate  entitled  : 
"  Ideen  zu  einer  allgemeiuen  Geschichte  in  weltbiirgerlieher 
Absicht." 

To  the  numerous  views  in  Herder's  work,  which  we  are  apt  to 
regard  as  of  recent  origin,  belongs  the  fact  that  he  goes  back  to  the 
rudest  forms  of  culture,  and  traces  the  development  of  humanity 
through  Greece  and  Rome  and  the  Middle  Ages.  Thus  he  exam- 
ines the  condition  of  the  peoples  near  the  north  pole  in  America 
and  Asia,  and  gives  an  account  of  the  Africans,  lamenting  that 
more  is  not  known  of  them,  and  describes  the  Indians  of  North 
and  South  America.  The  title  in  German  is  "  Ideen  zur  Philoso- 
phic der  Geschichte  der  IMenschheit." 

The  English  reader  will  find  the  views  of  Comtc  accessible 
through  the  translation  and  condensation  of  his  "  Cours  de  Philo- 
sophic Positive,"  six  volumes,  1830-42,  by  Harriet  Martineau,  — 
in  a  volume  entitled  "  The  Positive  Philosophy  of  Auguste  Comte." 
It  omits  repetitions  and  material  of  little  concern.  The  use  of 
this  volume  can  be  the  more  conscientiously  recommended  because 
Comte  himself  was  so  pleased  with  it  that  he  gave  it  the  stamp  of 
his  authority  by  having  it  translated  into  French.  On  the  history 
of  the  idea  of  society,  see  the  book  on  "  Social  Physics,"  the  last  in 
the  volume. 

In  monographs,  in  works  on  philosophy,  and  in  encyclopaedias, 
the  student  will  find  numerous  discussions  of  Comte's  system.  In 
Ward's  "  Dynamic  Sociology  "  the  first  chapter  is  devoted  to  this 
subject.  J.  S.  Mill's  volume  on  "  A.  Comte  and  Positivism  "  dis- 
cusses both  the  eax-lier  and  the  later  views  of  Comte.  E.  Caird's 
"  Tlie  Social  Philosophy  and  Religion  of  Comte  "  is  a  condensed 
exposition  and  criticism,  especially  strong  in  testing  the  Positive 
Philosophy  by  the  systems  of  German  philosophers. 

The  author  of  this  Introduction  has  found  the  work  of  Wantig, 
already  mentioned,  the  ablest  critical  account  of  Comte.  Besides 
an  exposition  and  critique  of  Comte,  it  contains  a  brief  account  of 
his  predecessors  and  successors.  Among  the  numerous  French 
writers  on  Comte  are  Littre :  "  Aug.  Comte  et  la  Philosophic  Posi- 
tive," and  Rig  :  "  La  Philosophic  Positive  par  Aug.  Comtc, 
r^sum^e." 

All  of  Herbert  Spencer's  works  bear  on  Sociology,  not  merely 


42       INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

those  with  that  title.  For  the  whole  system  of  his  Synthetic 
Philosophy,  the  iii-st  volume,  "  First  Principles,"  is  fundamental. 
Wiintig's  book  contains  a  bibliography  of  Sociology.  "What 
to  Head,"  by  the  Fabian  Society,  Loudon,  contains  a  long  list  of 
books  on  social  subjects,  such  as  socialism,  the  history  and  condi- 
tion of  labor,  and  how  to  elevate  the  masses. 

In  "  The  Social  Problem  "  the  author  of  this  Introduction  gives 
numerous  social  works,  particularly  such  as  bear  on  the  burning 
social  questions. 

Besides  the  works  mentioned  in  the  following  chapters,  a  brief 
list  of  French,  German,  and  English  books  is  here  added. 

Dui'kheim  :  "  De  la  division  du  travail  social." 

Fouillde  :  "  La  science  sociale  contemporaine." 

Novicow  :  "  Les  luttes  entre  societes  humaines." 

Roberty  :  "  La  sociologie." 

De  Greef  :  "  Introduction  h  la  sociologie." 

Ratzenhofer :  "  Die  Sociologische  Erkenntniss.  Positive  Phi- 
losophie  des  socialen  Lebens." 
Schiiffle:  "Bau  und  Leben  des  socialen  Korpers,"  4  vols. 
Professor  L.  Gumplowicz,  who  occupies  an  exclusively  naturalis- 
tic standpoint,  has  four  books  on  Sociology  :  "  Der  Rossenkampf," 
"  Grundriss  der  Sociologie,"  "  Sociologie  und  Politik,"  "  Die  Socio- 
logische Staatsidee."  The  third  contains  a  sketch  of  recent  socio- 
logical literature  in  France,  Belgium,  Italy,  Germany  and  Austria, 
and  America. 

Simmel :  "  Ueber  Sociale  DifEerenzierung." 

Mackenzie  :  "  Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy."  A  suggestive 
philosophical  rather  than  scientific  discussion. 

Two  reviews  are  devoted  wholly  to  Sociology,  Rente  Internationale 
cJe  Sociologie,  edited  by  Rend  Worms,  Paris,  and  The  American 
Journal  of  Sociology,  by  Albion  W.  Small,  Chicago. 

In  numerous  other  journals,  especially  the  political  and  eco- 
nomic ones,  sociological  subjects  are  frequently  discussed.  The 
same  is  true  of  works  on  the  state,  on  poliiical  economj^,  on  com- 
munism and  socialism,  on  culture  and  history.  IMany  of  the 
German  works  in  these  departments  are  of  especial  value. 

Sociology  is  becoming  a  favorite  study  in  America.  Besides  the 
work  of  Ward  on  "  Dynamic  Sociology,"  there  are  two  volumes  by 
J.  Bascom,  "  Sociology  "  and  "  Social  Theory."  The  "  Introduc- 
tion to  the    Study  of   Society,"   by  Small   and    Vincent,    is   for 


THE   GENESIS   OF  THE  IDEA   OF  SOCIETY.       43 

beginners.  "Introduction  to  Sociology,"  by  Artluir  Fairbanks, 
contains  a  valuable  bibliography.  A  complete  system  is  aimed  at 
by  Professor  Giddings  in  "  Principles  of  Sociology." 

This  list  is  only  preliminary.  At  the  close  of  the  chapter  on 
"  Method  "  the  student  will  find  directions  for  tlie  use  of  sociologi- 
cal literature  with  a  view  to  farther  research  without  the  aid  of  a 
teacher. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Genesis  of  the  Idea  cf  Society  in  Individuals.  Difficul- 
ties. Development  of  the  Idea  in  Humanity.  Unconscious 
Basis  of  much  Social  Action.  Social  Conceptions  in  early 
Stages  of  Humanity.  Early  Social  Life.  Reasons  for  the 
late  Development  of  Sociology.  Social  Notions  of  Ancient 
Oriental  Nations.  Why  Greece  and  Rome  were  not  pre- 
pared for  the  Science  of  Society.  Preparation  for  Sociology 
in  Judaism  and  Christianity.  Ideas  and  Institutions  of  the 
Middle  Ages  favorable  and  unfavorable  for  Social  Science. 
Social  Development  by  means  of  Humanism  and  the  Ref- 
ormation. Changes  ia  Modern  Thought  and  Society  favor- 
able to  Sociology.  Enlarged  Conception  of  the  World. 
Political  and  Economic  Internationalism.  Preparatory  Ideas 
of  Vico,  Montesquieu,  Grotius,  Schiller,  Herder,  Eant.  Comte's 
Work.  His  Method.  Hierarchy  of  the  Sciences.  The  Three 
Stages  of  Development.  The  Positive  Stage.  Comte's  Place 
in  Sociology.  Other  Writers  on  Sociology.  Sociological 
Literature.  The  Needs  of  Sociology.  How  can  they  be 
met  ?  Review  the  entire  Chapter,  giving  a  Summary  of  its 
Contents. 


44       INTRuJjL'CnuN  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER   II. 

DEFINITION    AND    SCOPE    OF    SOCIOLOGY. 

The  Problem.  What  is  Sociology  ?  What  the  exact 
aphcre  of  its  investigations  ?  The  definition  gives  the 
subject  in  cpitouic,  condensing  to  the  utmost  the  materials 
involved.  It  outlines  the  subject- matter  as  the  nucleus  of 
all  disciissions.  By  defining  Sociology  ive  get  a  guide 
for  sociological  research.  If  the  investigation  is  to  be 
rational,  it  must  have  a  definite  end  toioard  the  attain- 
ment of  lohieh  tire  energies   are  directed. 

The  definition  is  the  centre  from  which  the  circumfer- 
ence is  draivn  rnarlcing  the  limit  of  the  inquiry.  Sociol- 
ogy deals  with  human  society;  this  gives  the  focus  of 
thought  and  the  scope  of  sociological  research.  Compara- 
tive Sociology  is  another  subject.  The  discovery  of  Sociol- 
ogy is  the  condition  for  its  comparison.  After  it  has 
been  constructed  many  questions  may  be  relevant  which 
woidd  only  be  confusing  so  long  as  the  sociological  material 
is  in  a  chaotic  state.  To  the  student  of  Sociology  every- 
thing is  valuable  in  proportion  as  it  leads  him  into  tJix 
essence  of  his  subject-matter,  human  society. 

A.    Definition. 

ruopKULY  s})oakinii:,  the  development  of  a  subject  is 
lis  (Icfinilion,  the  entire  system  being  merely  an  expla- 
nation of  lh(j  theme  i  I  self.      So,  too,  the  contents  of  a 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  45 

volume  are  but  an  exposition  of  its  title.  In  the  begin- 
ning, however,  we  can  start  with  a  general  idea  which 
iixes  and  limits  a  theme  sufficiently  to  make  the  aim 
definite  and  the  study  rational.  The  definition  itself  is 
but  a  seed  whose  richness  of  content  can  only  be  dis- 
covered by  the  process  of  its  unfolding.  As  a  plant 
springs  from  a  seed  and  culminates  in  fruit  which  is 
the  same  as  the  seed  whence  it  sprang,  but  in  richer 
measure ;  so  with  the  unfolding  of  a  subject :  it  begins 
with  a  definition,  expands  that  definition,  and  in  the 
end  is  still  true  to  the  definition,  but  contains  it  in  a 
fuller  and  more  developed  form  than  at  the  start. 

The  term  Sociology  has  often  been  denounced  as  a 
barbarism  because  composed  of  a  Latin  and  a  Greek 
word.  This,  however,  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  sense 
and  applicability  of  the  term.  It  stands  for  a  definite 
and  most  important  department  of  thought,  has  gained 
general  recognition,  is  well  adapted  to  its  purpose,  and 
has  secured  a  permanent  place  in  literature.  Sociology 
designates  the  science  of  society.  It  thus  contains  two 
ideas  which  require  elucidation,  namely,  society  and 
science.  The  latter  can  best  be  considered  in  a  separate 
chapter,  when  the  idea  of  society  is  more  definitely 
before  us.  With  the  aim  of  learning  all  that  is  know- 
able  respecting  society  ever  kept  in  view,  it  may  even 
be  a  hindrance  to  determine  at  the  start,  before  the 
materials  to  be  shaped  are  known,  just  what  form  the 
final  results  shall  take ;  better  leave  that,  it  seems,  to 
the  development  itself.  Here  at  least  we  are  solely 
concerned  with  the  general  sense  in  which  society,  the 
subject-matter  of  all  our  inquiries,  is  taken  by  Soci- 
ology. After  tracing  the  genesis  of  the  idea  of  society, 
we  now  concentrate  our  thought  on  that  idea  as  the 
object  of  sociological  investigation. 


46        INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Society  (socio,  socius,  societas)  means  association, 
some  kind  of  combination  or  union;  it  involves  the 
notion  of  partnership,  of  mutuality,  of  co-operation,  of 
holding  something  in  common.  Inanimate  objects  are 
a2;"'reo;ated ;  but  of  living  beings,  at  least  of  such  as  are 
of  a  high  order,  we  speak  as  associated.  Association 
involves  vital,  organic  relations,  a  union  of  inner, 
psychical  factors,  not  merely  external  contact.  So 
essential  is  the  psychical  element  in  association  that 
society  is  perfect  in  proportion  to  the  culture  attained. 
In  human  society,  the  object  of  our  inquiry,  the  highest 
association  is  attainable. 

Sometimes  human  beings  are  regarded  as  forming  an 
aggregation  as  distinct  from  association,  as  when  they 
move  along  the  street  or  travel  in  the  same  train  or 
boat  without  intercourse.  The  same  locality  and 
external  contact  are  taken  as  means  of  aggregation,  not 
of  association.  Strictly  speaking,  this  is  correct;  but 
it  is  not  the  whole  truth.  A  more  complete  view 
shows  that  the  aggregation  of  human  beings  contains  a 
potential  association  which  is  not  possible  for  lower 
organisms.  Social  unity  exists  independent  of  our 
consciousness  of  it;  I  belong  to  society  whether  I  am 
aware  of  it  or  not.  Every  deeper  view  reveals  the  fact 
that  those  Avho  do  not  know  one  another,  yet  have  a 
common  humanity,  have  essentially  the  same  faculties 
and  tendencies,  and  share  a  multitude  of  things  which 
pertain  equally  to  all  and  give  all  human  beings  an 
ideal  unity.  These  associative  elements  really  exist, 
and  every  a})prchcnsion  of  the  actuality  recognizes 
them.  Thus  ideally  and  actually,  though  not  always 
consciously,  human  beings  arc  associated,  as  brutes  and 
trees  and  stones  cannot  be.  The  man  whose  conscious- 
ness of  the  social  reality  is  most  complete,  can  claim 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  47 

ties  which  associate  him  with  every  member  of  the 
human  family.^ 

This  gives  the  comprehensive  view  involved  in  Soci- 
ology. We  want  a  discipline  which  includes  the  whole 
of  humanity  in  its  associated  capacity.  Comte  speaks 
of  society  as  "  comprehending,  in  a  scientific  sense,  the 
whole  of  the  human  species,  and  chiefly  the  whole  of 
the  white  race."  While  some  in  their  sociological 
inquiries  may  consider  chiefly  one  race,  others  another, 
that  does  not  now  concern  us,  the  essential  point  being 
that  our  discipline  includes  the  whole  human  family. ^ 

Humanity  is  thus  apprehended  as  a  society,  as  con- 
sisting of  units  which  are  somehow  bound  together  by 
elements  they  have  in  common.     Some  things  the  units 

1  Under  this  most  compreheusive  view  of  society  many  others  of  a 
more  specific  nature  are  embraced,  and  it  is  the  business  of  Sociology  to 
bring  out  their  distinctive  marks.  Some  societies  are  so  large  and  so 
scattered  that  the  members  cannot  know  one  another,  as  in  the  case  of 
churches  and  labor  organizations ;  others  are  small  and  local,  so  that  the 
members  come  in  contact.  The  tie  of  humanity  is  common  to  all  associa- 
tions ;  but  the  specific  bond  of  union  and  particular  purpose  of  a  society 
determine  its  peculiarity  and  distinctness.  Thus  we  have  human  society 
(associated  humanity)  and  human  societies  (the  various  associations  in 
humanity).  Especially  important  is  it  to  distinguish  between  societies 
dependent  on  what  they  have  in  common  and  societies  which  actively 
share  and  promote  certain  objects.  What  human  beings  have  in  common 
may  be  a  passive  possession ;  but  in  the  ordinary,  more  specific  sense,  so- 
cieties involve  a  union  of  active  energies.  Between  society  as  a  commun- 
ity involving  common  possessions,  and  society  as  an  active  association  of 
different  wills,  the  German  language  makes  a  distinction,  using  for  the 
former  Gemeinschnft,  for  the  latter  Gesellschaft.  ("  Gemeiuschaft  uud 
Gesellschaft,"  by  Ferdinand  Tonnies.) 

2  I  am  temj)ted  to  define  Sociology  as  the  science  of  associated  human- 
ity, that  is,  of  humanity  so  far  as  it  is  united,  so  far  as  it  is  associated.  If 
Sociology  does  not  include  every  form  of  human  association,  it  will  be  in- 
complete, and  another  discipline  will  l)e  required  in  order  to  embrace 
the  social  forms  which  Sociology  ignores.  While  making  Sociology  the 
science  of  associated  humanity,  we  of  course  do  not  need  to  place  equal 
emphasis  on  all  forms  of  society. 


48       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

share,  and  these  are  the  bonds  of  association.  There 
are  elements  which  men  share  with  the  brute  creation, 
and  a  strong  tendency  has  been  manifested  to  involve 
in  the  discussions  of  Sociology  the  analogies  to  human 
society  found  in  the  inferior  creation.  This  may  be 
intended  to  elucidate  the  subject,  and  sometimes  does, 
but  often  confuses  it.  Mere  analogies  must  not  be 
taken  for  identity.  Whatever  biology  and  anthropology 
may  have  to  say  about  the  origin  of  man  and  his  rela- 
tion to  the  animal  creation,  Sociology  deals  with  human 
association ;  and  can  leave  the  question  of  man's  rela- 
tion to  the  rest  of  the  organic  world  to  other  disci- 
plines, or  else  consider  that  question  after  it  has  fully 
explained  human  society.  If  Sociology  must  first 
evolve  man  from  the  brute,  it  is  in  danger  of  never 
reaching  that  human  association  whose  interpretation 
is  its  sole  business. 

The  total  and  most  comprehensive  conception  of 
Sociology  involves  humanity  as  it  is,  has  been,  and  will 
be.  This  is  the  grand  ideal;  as  we  cannot  isolate  a 
part  of  humanity  from  the  rest,  so  we  cannot  abstract 
the  human  family  as  existing  at  any  particular  time ; 
but  in  order  to  think  it  in  its  completeness,  must  con- 
sider it  in  its  organic  connection  with  the  past  and  the 
future.  Thought  docs  not  stop  here,  but  seeks  to  relate 
man  to  all  living  beings,  to  inorganic  matter,  and  to 
the  entire  universe.  But  the  scheme  is  too  great  for 
perfect  realization.  Not  only  are  we  obliged  to  con- 
fine ourselves  to  human  society,  but  even  that  presents 
severe  limits  to  our  investigations.  Humanity  as  it  is 
to-day  is  so  vast  and  complicated  that  only  a  part  of  it 
can  be  understood  by  the  most  diligent  specialist;  of 
the  past  but  few  records  were  made,  and  many  of  those 
are    lost;  respecting   the   future,    our   limitations   arc 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  49 

painfully  evident.  With  a  full  consciousness  of  our 
limitations,  we  aim  at  the  interpretation  of  human 
society  so  far  as  knowable. 

Nevertheless,  the  comprehensive  idea  of  society  as 
not  limited  by  locality  and  time  is  essential,  because 
the  only  true  idea.  What  do  we  understand  by  a 
nation  ?  Surely  not  a  people  as  existing  merely  at  this 
moment.  By  a  nation  we  mean  a  people  with  a  con- 
tinuous existence,  with  a  past,  a  present,  and  a  future, 
a  totality  of  association  regardless  of  time.  As  an 
individual  recognizes  his  connection  with  his  anccstoi's, 
not  merely  with  the  family  as  it  now  exists,  so  it  is 
with  the  consciousness  of  a  peo[)le.  The  same  is  true 
respecting  humanity;  it  is  a  qualitative  totality, 
regardless  of  time. 

The  same  process  must  be  adopted  respecting  every 
social  form;  it  can  be  completely  thought  only  in  con- 
nection with  its  historical  origin  and  development, 
and,  if  truly  alive,  as  an  energy  pushing  onward  into 
the  future.  If  humanity  is  really  a  unity,  no  individual 
in  it  can  be  fully  considered  without  being  viewed  in 
his  relation  to  the  totality.  One  who  grasps  this  idea 
realizes  that  he  is  so  related  to  humanity  that  no  part 
of  it  can  be  foreign  to  him. 

Society  as  including  humanity  as  a  totality  embraces 
the  largest  possible  number  of  individuals;  but  aside 
from  this,  the  contents  of  this  abstract  idea  are  the 
emptiest  possible.  Humanity,  so  far  as  a  society, 
involves  only  such  elements  as  belong  to  every  human 
being  in  his  association  v  i(h  others.  You  cannot  say 
that  human  society  is  enlightened,  or  refined,  or  Chris- 
tian, for  it  may  include  savages  or  barbarians.  A 
modern  scientific  or  literary  association  is  not  only  a 
human  society,  but  contains  many  other  elements  than 

4 


60        lyTliODUVTlON  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

such  as  belong  to  humanity  at  large;  its  contents  are 
richer.  While  we  need  the  idea  of  humanity  in  Soci- 
ology, we  must  not  imagine  that  this  general  conception 
is  the  sole  object  oi"  sociological  inquiry.  Usually  the 
term  "society  "  is  taken  in  a  more  limited  sense,  apply- 
ing to  individuals  more  intimately  associated  than 
merely  as  members  of  the  same  human  family.  From 
the  few  loose  bonds  we  proceed  to  the  numerous  and  in- 
timate ones.  Thus  besides  the  common  ties  of  human- 
ity, men  are  connected  by  local  bonds ;  they  constitute  a 
distinct  community  with  well-defined  interests;  their 
associative  elements  are  educational,  legal,  political, 
national.  But  aside  from  these  extensive  associative 
bonds  which  are  inevitable,  not  dependent  on  the  choice 
or  consciousness  of  the  individuals,  there  are  numerous 
other  societies  which  can  be  put  under  the  head  of 
voluntary  association  or  organization.  Thus  men  com- 
bine for  })articular  ends;  they  organize.  These  volun- 
tary associations  are  constituted  for  intellectual, 
literary,  aesthetic,  ethical,  religions,  political,  indus- 
trial, recreative  purposes,  and  serve  to  bring  the  mem- 
bers into  peculiarly  intimate  relations. 

Sociology  as  dealing  with  human  association  per  se, 
not  limited  to  a  particular  kind  of  association,  must 
take  into  account  all  the  associative  elements,  whether 
they  be  the  most  general  and  most  empty,  or  specific 
and  rich  in  content.  Sociology  will  be  incomplete  in 
proportion  as  its  interpretations  leave  any  ])rinciples  of 
human  association  unexplained.  This  settles  the  atti- 
tude of  our  subject  to  the  family  and  the  state,  which 
some  want  to  exclude  from  tlic  donuxin  of  human 
society.  They  claim  that  the  family  is  not  a  society, 
but  the  social  unit  from  which  society  is  formed;  and 
es])ecially   in    Germany  has   there  been  disimte  as  to 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  51 

whether  the  state  is  to  be  considered  as  a  society  or  as 
an  institution  apart  from  society.^ 

The  family  differs  from  all  other  institutions,  but 
it  is  un(}uestionably  a  form  of  human  association.  The 
fact  that  its  grounds  of  association  are  peculiar  does 
not  destroy  its  character  as  a  society ;  that  only  makes 
it  a  distinct  kind  of  society.  Indeed,  as  involving  the 
most  intimate  bonds  of  union,  the  family  constitutes 
society  in  the  most  perfect  sense.  Whether  we  study 
society  historically  or  as  a  system  of  association,  Ave 
are  obliged  to  lay  particular  stress  on  the  family. ^ 

1  So  eminent  a  writer  on  political  science  as  Robert  von  Mohl  uses 
"society"  in  a  very  limited  sense.  ("  Eucyclopaedie  der  Staatswisseu- 
schaften,"  27.)  He  excludes  from  it  tlie  family,  tlie  gens,  the  community, 
and  the  state.  He  includes  in  society  only  sucli  unions  as  are  formed  by 
distinctions  of  birth  (nobility),  or  by  means  of  superior  conditions  (as 
aristocracy  of  talent  or  position),  or  by  similarity  of  occupation,  or 
through  economic  conditions  (the  wealthy,  the  middle,  and  the  poorer 
classes),  or  through  religion.  Rut  by  thus  limiting  society  it  is  evident 
that  Sociology  is  not  the  science  of  human  association,  but  of  only  a 
limited  part  of  that  association.  Vv'hat  Von  Mohl  includes  in  society 
cannot  be  understood  properly  unless  it  is  correlated  to  the  forms  of  associ- 
ation which  he  excludes.  It  is  much  better  to  include  all  human  association 
in  Sociology  ;  then  special  kinds  of  association,  as  peculiarly  valuable, 
can  be  treated  more  fully  than  the  rest. 

^  The  family  as  the  original  social  unit  deserves  special  study.  It  is 
prominent  as  the  generic  social  type.  The  Jews  were  viewed  as  a  family, 
"the  children  of  Israel."  "The  household  of  faith"  designates  Chris- 
tians as  a  family.  It  is  common  in  the  Old  Testament  to  designate  all 
descendants  of  a  common  ancestor  as  children,  thus  for  all  generations  re- 
taining the  conception  of  the  family.  The  "  human  family  "  shows  to 
what  an  extent  the  idea  lias  been  carried.  Indeed,  the  family  is  not  only 
the  primitive  association,  but  also  typical  of  association  in  general.  It 
stands  for  unity,  for  intimacy,  for  close  relationship,  for  community  of 
possessions,  thoughts,  feelings,  and  actions ;  and  associations  are  perfect 
in  proportion  as  they  approach  the  family  type.  In  some  degree  every 
society  partakes  of  the  nature  of  family  ties.  Affection  and  friendship 
have  their  origin  in  the  family  ;  there  play  and  recreation  have  their  full 
exercise;  the  family  is  the  first  school;  it  trains  in  moral  and  social 
affairs  as  well  as  the  intellect ;  it  has  a  common  altar  as  well  as  a  common 


52        INTRODUCTION   TO   STUDY   OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

For  similar  reasons  we  reject  the  theory  that  the 
state  is  not  inchicled  in  society.  It  is  not  a  society  like 
the  family,  nor  is  it  a  voluntary  organization;  never- 
theless it  is  a  form  of  human  association  of  peculiar 
importance. 

The  family  and  the  state  heing  peculiar  and  specially 
important  forms  of  society,  can  receive  separate  treat- 
ment. This  may  be  advantageous  because  they  will 
thus  secure  more  attention  and  better  development. 
That,  however,  cannot  take  them  out  of  Sociology. 
They  can  be  understood  only  in  their  relation  to 
humanity  at  large  and  as  connected  with  all  its  other 
social  forms. 

The  subject-matter  of  Sociology  is  thus  made  definite, 
—  every  kind  of  human  association.  We  are  chiefly 
concerned  about  the  associative  essences,  their  infinite 
mnnifostations  interesting  us  only  so  far  as  revelations 
of  the  social  substance. 

The  notion  of  society  as  inclusive  of  the  ^vhole  of  humanity  is 
essential,  since  all  human  beings  have  elements  in  common  and  are 
somehow  associated.  Even  if  some  men  were  isolated  now  from 
the  rest  of  humanity,  there  are  indissoluble  ties  which  connect 
them  with  it,  and  they  can  never  be  abstracted  from  the  family  to 
which  they  belong,  whose  organic  connection  with  the  human  family 
is  indisputable.  Leslie  Stephen  ("  Science  of  Ethics,"  120)  says : 
"  \Ve  may  thus  consider  the  race  as  forming  what  is  called  a  social 
organism."  Crabbe  ("  Synonymes  ")  defines  society,  "when  ex- 
pressing the  abstract  notion  of  associating,"  as  indicating  "that 
which  is  common  to  mankind."  When  we  speak  of  the  nature 
and  laws  of  society,  we  use  "  society  "  as  inclusive  of  humanity.  The 
unity  involved  in  the  expression  "  human  family"  is  significant. 

In  "  Principles  of  Sociology  "  (i.  436)  Mr.  Sjiencer  limits  the  idea 

hearth,  and  is  the  primitive  cliurch  ;  it  is  an  economic  unit  and  the  origi- 
nal industrial  society,  —  a  real  co-o])crative  association  ;  in  its  order,  its  au- 
thority, its  obedience,  we  liave  a  type  of  the  state.  It  is  astonishing  how 
a  study  of  the  family  gives  a  revelation  of  society  in  epitgnio. 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  53 

of  society  to  later  stages  of  luuiiau  development,  not  including  the 
associations  of  primitive  man.  Of  society  he  says  :  "Withholding 
the  name  from  an  ever-changing  cluster  such  as  primitive  men 
form,  we  apply  it  only  where  some  constancy  in  the  distribution  of 
parts  has  resulted  from  settled  life."  This  accounts  for  the  fact 
that  he  treats  society  as  consisting  of  certain  instiUitioJis  which  he 
discusses.  Thus,  however,  some  of  the  most  important  social 
factors  are  missed.  The  associations  of  primitive  man,  however 
fleeting,  were  beginnings  of  social  evolution,  without  which  the 
later  stages  of  social  development  cannot  be  understood.  We  shall 
also  see  the  importance  of  other  social  groups  than  such  as  are 
organized  or  institutional. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Aim  of  Definition.  Relation  of  the  Definition  to  the  De- 
velopment of  the  Subject.  Individualistic  and  Socieil  Point 
of  Vie-w.  Contiguous  Association  (Space),  Successive  (Time). 
Effect  of  Association.  Limit  of  Changes  by  means  of  Animal 
Association.  Capacity  for  Social  Progress  through  Human 
Association.  "What  does  Human  Society  as  viewed  by 
Sociology  include  ?  Reasons  for  not  limiting  Society  to 
Organizations  and  Institutions.  Why  are  the  Family  and 
the  State  included  ?  Importance  of  the  Family  as  a  Social 
Type.  Why  defer  the  Discussion  of  the  Scientific  Character 
of  Sociology  ? 


B.    The  Scope  of  Sociology. 

The  above  places  before  us  human  society  as  the 
subject-matter  of  our  discipline.  It  is,  however,  as 
we  have  seen,  difficult  to  grasp  the  idea  of  society. 
Much  may  be  said  about  society,  just  as  about  the  uni- 
verse, humanity,  philosophy,  science,  while  tlie  object 
itself  remains  obscure.  The  following  considerations 
may  make  the  idea  more  clear. 

1.  The  most  evident  objects  in  every  gathering  are 
the   individuals;  and  these  are   usually  taken  as  the 


54       INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ultimate  units  in  social  analysis. ^  The  individual 
himself  is  indeed  a  compound  of  great  complexity;  and 
if  we  M^anted  to  analyze  him  completely,  we  should  not 
be  able  to  stop  until  we  reached  the  primitive  elements 
of  which  he  is  composed.  But  the  individual  is  treated 
as  the  ultimate  factor  because  he  acts  as  a  unit.  Even 
if  considered  as  composed  of  billions  of  particles,  still 
he  is  an  organism,  a  complex  system  forming  a  unity 
and  controlled  by  a  single  power, 

2.  We  cannot  consider  the  individuals  as  forming 
society  by  merely  adding  them  together  as  so  many 
units.  They  are  living  beings,  and  as  such  act  on 
each  other.  Thus  the  meml)ers  of  a  family  do  not 
merely  live  in  the  same  place  and  at  the  same  time,  but 
they  also  influence  one  another.  It  is  like  hydrogen 
and  oxygen,  which  not  merely  exist  side  by  side,  but 
coalesce  and  produce  a  new  substance,  water.  In  order 
therefore  to  ai)j)rehcnd  society,  we  must  regard  the 
individual  members  as  so  many  forces  which  act  and 
react  on  one  another.  This  interaction  of  forces  is  the 
essential  idea  in  association  and  socialization.  It  is 
the  purpose  of  our  study  to  determine  how  men  act  on 
one  another,  what  the  social  forces  are,  and  what 
results  they  produce.  Society  thus  appears  as  a  system 
of  endless  energies  ever  active  and  ever  promoting 
changes. 

3.  Difficult  as  it  may  be  to  form  a  clear  conception 
of  this  constant  interaction  of  the  social  forces,  it  is 
easy  to  apprehend  the  definite  jiroducts  I'csulting  from 
the  interaction.  The  ])r()ducts  of  association  and  so- 
cialization are  the  numerous  social  grou])S,  such  as 
families,  communities,  and  associations  of  all  kinds. 
As    individuals   form   social    grou])s,    so  these  groups 

^  How  far  this  is  correct  will  be  shown  later. 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  55 

may  be  luiitt'd  to  form  larger  groups,  as  Avhcn  labor 
associations  unite  to  form  one  great  combination  of 
laborers.  It  is  the  province  of  Sociology  to  interpret 
social  groups,  to  explain  their  relation  to  one  another 
and  the  combinations  they  form,  extending  to  states 
and  nations  and  humanity  itself. 

4.  In  its  largest  sense  Sociology  as  the  science  of 
society  aims  at  the  laws  for  all  kinds  of  human  associa- 
tion. Thus  it  ought  to  explain  processes  of  socializa- 
tion which  are  only  casual  or  temporary,  as  when  men 
associate  in  travel  or  meet  in  a  company  which  remains 
together  for  a  few  hours  and  never  meets  again.  But 
society  may  become  perfect  in  proportion  as  the  asso- 
ciation is  abiding,  when  it  becomes  an  institution  and 
takes  an  organized  form,  as  the  family,  the  church,  the 
state,  guilds,  the  various  literary  and  labor  organiza- 
tions, and  the  like.  This  gives  definite  objects  of 
sociological  study,  and  on  these  permanent  social 
forms  especial  stress  has  been  placed  by  sociological 
writers. 

5.  In  order  fully  to  understand  the  results  of  the 
interaction  of  the  social  forces  we  shall  have  to  do 
more  than  consider  the  social  groups  formed.  All 
human  products  are  involved  in  socialization,  the 
private  ones  of  the  individual  alone  excluded.  Yet 
the  individual  himself  is  a  social  product;  he  could 
not  be  what  he  is  without  society.  Therefore  inven- 
tions, ideas,  and  systems,  of  individuals,  are  in  a 
measure  social  results.  Among  clearly  defined  social 
products  we  place  language,  literature,  politics,  eco- 
nomics,  science,   art,   and  history. 

We  do  not  use  force  here  in  its  physical  sense  as  that 
which  causes  or  changes  motion.  It  is  employed  to 
designate   all   the  human  energies,   whether  physical, 


66       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

intellectual,  or  moral.  The  social  forces  therefore 
include  all  the  powers  that  work  in  society. 

The  five  points  specified  will  aid  the  beginner  to 
form  a  general  conception  of  the  scope  of  Sociology. 
Our  subject  is  not  limited  to  definite  social  organiza- 
tions; often  the  social  atmosphere  in  which  we  live 
and  from  which  we  draw  the  breath  of  life  is  more 
important. 

In  scientific  study  the  individual  object  or  fact  is 
valued  for  the  sake  of  the  law  it  involves.  The  phe- 
nomena of  nature  are  endless,  but  millions  of  them  are 
mere  repetitions.  In  order  to  gain  the  mastery  over 
nature,  we  seek  to  discover  the  laws  in  which  the  phe- 
nomena are  included.  Likewise  in  Sociology  it  is  this 
condensed  knowledge  at  which  we  aim.  The  myriad 
social  forms  with  endless  repetitions  confuse  the  mind. 
In  this  chaotic  mass  Sociology  aims  to  introduce  order 
by  the  discovery  of  principles,  essences,  laws,  and 
system. 

The  subject-matter  of  Sociology  is  the  scope  of  soci- 
ological inquiry.  This  subject-matter  consists  of  the 
associative  energies,  what  associates  men,  what  creates 
society,  and  what  results  from  the  action  of  the  asso- 
ciative forces.  We  want  in  Sociology  whatever  is 
essential  for  understanding  human  society  and  for  put- 
ting the  knowledge  gained  in  a  rational  social  system. 

When  the  scojie  of  Sociology  has  been  determined, 
the  investigation  should  be  strictly  limited  to  the 
sphere  designated.  lutormiuable  confusion  is  occa- 
sioned by  continually  passing  into  neighboring  or 
foreign  regions,  devoting  to  side-issues  that  attention 
Avhich  should  Ite  confined  to  sociological  inquiry. 
This  erratic  wandering  is  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that 
Sociology  has  not  been  sharply  severed  from  other  dis- 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  57 

ciplines,  and  therefore  docs  not  stand  out  distinctly  as 
a  separate  science. 

Society  itself  should  be  brought  into  bold  relief  and 
all  discussion  concentrated  on  its  interpretation.  If 
the  whole  cosmos  is  to  be  drawn  into  the  investigation, 
where  is  the  limit  of  sociological  inquiry?  If  we  must 
first  evolve  the  universe  from  the  atoms  as  its  seeds, 
we  are  in  danger  of  being  involved  in  such  perplexities 
as  never  to  reach  man ;  and  the  way  from  the  star-dust 
to  society  is  so  long  and  bewildering  that  we  are  afraid 
of  being  lost  in  some  nebulous  region  before  we  come 
to  Sociology.  These  endless  wanderings  may  be  })ar- 
donable  so  long  as  the  idea  of  society  itself  is  in  cun- 
fusion  and  men  do  not  know  what  they  are  investigating 
in  the  study  of  Sociology.  Were  the  subject-matter 
itself  fully  outlined,  then  the  relation  of  society  to  the 
universe  might  be  attempted,  but  until  that  is  done  we 
must  insist  that  in  Sociology  the  attention  be  concen- 
trated on  society  itself. 

The  limitation  here  urged  is  especially  essential  for 
an  introductory  volume.  In  it  much  must  be  omitted 
which  demands  discussion  in  a  work  on  Sociology  itself. 
Nor  can  the  beginner  be  expected  to  take  up  subjects  of 
great  complexity  which  one  who  has  spent  his  life  in 
developing  them  as  a  specialist  can  discuss  with  ease. 
Still  other  considerations  lead  us  to  omit  discussions 
which  have  become  common  in  larger  sociological 
works.  Certain  studies  must  be  considered  as  prelimi- 
nary to  Sociology,  and  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  they 
have  been  pursued  before  the  science  of  society  is 
studied.  Sociology  cannot  be  expected  to  discuss  prob- 
lems which  are  fundamental  for  all  scientific  inquiry, 
and  therefore  not  peculiar  to  Sociology.  These  prob- 
lems should  be  left  to  the  specific  departments  where 


58       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

they  belong,  and  can  be  most  thoroughly  investigated, 
just  as  the  sociologist  demands  that  what  is  peculiar 
to  Sociology  shall  be  treated  as  a  sociological  specialty. 
It  is  of  course  necessary  to  show  the  relation  of  Soci- 
ology to  other  disciplines;  sometimes  the  sociologist 
may  have  to  develop  elements  in  these  disciplines  to 
get  the  proper  sociological  material  and  a  firm  soci- 
ological basis.  But  the  science  of  society  is  never  to 
wander  into  other  departments  so  as  to  lose  sight  of  its 
specialty,  the  explanation  of  human  society. 

The  following  are  among  the  problems  which  the 
beginner  has  no  right  to  expect  Sociology  to  solve  for 
him,  nor  need  he  postpone  his  sociological  investiga- 
tions till  they  have  been  solved. 

1.  The  problem  of  materialism  and  spiritualism. 
This  should  be  relegated  to  metaphysics,  where  it 
belongs.  The  problem  remains  a  problem  after  the 
proposed  solutions  of  the  profoundcst  philosophers. 
Those  sociologists  who  imagine  that  a  few  empirical 
platitudes  suffice  to  give  them  a  warrant  for  their 
materialistic  or  spiritualistic  basis,  should  be  left  to 
their  imagination.  The  usual  outcome  is  a  shallow 
dogmatism  which  dominates  all  the  inquiries.  Careful 
thinkers  have  learned  to  treat  the  ultimate  problems 
with  great  reserve,  taking  what  is  distinct  and  peculiar 
as  distinct  and  peculiar,  without  pretending  to  explain 
connections  and  causes  which  are  inexplical)lc.  Thus 
mental  phenomena  are  readily  distinguished  from  the 
physical  ones.  Their  relation  to  the  body,  particularly 
the  nerves,  is  not  fully  understood,  and  this  is  to  be 
admitted.  To  treat  mental  processes  as  products  of 
purely  material  processes  is  unwarranted  and  at  best  a 
mere  hypothesis.  Scientific  students  of  the  actual 
world  take  i)henomena  as  they  are,  and  leave  to  meta- 
physics the  mctai)hysical  questions  involved. 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  59 

2.  Our  subject  is  Sociology,  nut  biology;  and  as 
biology  has  its  distinct  sphere,  so  has  Sociology.  Much 
that  is  biological  can  be  used  with  advantage  in  socio- 
logical interpretation;  but  Sociology  is  not  to  be  lost 
in  biology.  Biology  teems  with  unsettled  problems. 
Besides,  human  phenomena  may  be  different  from  those 
of  animals  below  man.  There  is  danger  of  taking 
similarity  or  analogy  for  identity.  It  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  human  association,  of  which  we  are  con- 
scious, can  be  better  understood  by  constant  reference 
to  animal  associations,  of  which  we  are  not  equally 
conscious.  The  perversion  seems  complete  when  early 
human  associations  are  ignored,  while  those  of  inferior 
animals  are  emphasized.  Then,  there  is  danger  of 
keeping  human  society  on  a  low  level  by  continually 
seeking  for  analogies  in  the  brute  creation.  .Human 
society  can  be  understood  only  by  the  study  of  human 
society,  just  as  nature  must  be  interpreted  by  the 
study  of  nature.  Analogies  may  furnish  helpful  data 
without  giving  sociological  laws.^ 

3,  The  theory  of  evolution  is  among  the  most  power- 
ful factors  in  modern  thought.  The  truth  embodied  in 
it  has  wrought  a  revolution  in  thinking,  particularly 

1  Some  aiialugies  may  be  specially  valuable,  as  iu  the  case  of  ants  and 
bees.  Their  remarkable  ori^aiiizatioii,  the  peculiarities  in  structure  and 
function,  and  their  division  of  labor,  are  illustrative  of  various  forms 
and  processes  of  human  association.  We  naturally  expect  some  laws 
to  be  of  such  general  application  as  to  prevail  in  all  departments  of 
organic  life.  But  association  which  depends  on  rollexive  or  instincti\e 
action  can  never  bo  made  tlie  type  of  societies  in  which  reason  and  con- 
science, in  their  highest  forms  and  with  their  multifarious  products,  are 
essential  factors.  The  higher  development  can  interpret  the  lower  much 
lietter  than  the  lower  the  higher ;  and  human  association  is  the  condition 
for  interpreting  animal  association  far  more  completely  than  animal 
asfsociation  is  the  condition  for  determining  human  association.  In  either 
case,  however,  there  is  danger  of  attributing  to  the  lower  animals  what 
is  peculiar  to  man. 


CO       INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ill  tlie  domain  of  natural  science.  Its  very  compre- 
hensiveness makes  evolution  fascinating,  and  it  is  not 
surprising  that  some  of  its  enthusiasiic  discijjlcs  have 
))een  far  less  reserved  in  their  claims  llian  the  modest 
Darwin.  In  applying  it  to  Sociology,  it  must  he  treated 
as  a  theory,  which  it  really  is,  not  as  scientific  demon- 
stration. Besides,  it  professes  only  to  be  a  process,  a 
method  of  working,  a  law  of  development;  it  does  not 
propose  to  settle  the  question  of  the  origin  of  things. 
Even  if  the  exact  nature  of  evolution  in  biological 
processes  were  determined,  which  is  not  the  case,  that 
would  not  give  the  law  of  its  operation  in  human 
affairs. 

The  logic  of  science  teaches  us  that  wc  must  go 
directly  to  human  society  if  -we  want  to  learn  the  pro- 
cesses at  work  in  it.  The  short  cut  of  a  jyriori  assump- 
tions may  save  labor,  but  it  also  i)re vents  accuracy  and 
scientific  finality. 

In  the  ap])lication  of  the  theory  to  social  affairs  the 
exact  sense  of  evolution  should  be  determined.  The 
variety  of  meanings  in  which  the  term  is  used  has 
made  it  vague.  Sometimes  it  is  treated  as  if  it  ex- 
plained the  nature  and  process  of  the  universe,  whether 
inorganic  or  organic;  special  a})plications  of  it  are  also 
made  to  liiology;  it  is  even  employed  to  promote  ma- 
terialism. Among  scientists  themselves  there  has  been 
much  dispute  respecting  the  nature  of  evolution;  and 
since  the  exact  nature  of  the  process  is  still  in  question, 
extreme  caution  is  required  in  its  use  as  a  sociological 
law.  Especially  must  we  guard  against  making  a 
single  factor  in  evolution,  as  the  struggle  for  existence, 
or  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  the  sole  element  when 
others  ought  likewise  to  be  considered.  A  suj)erricial 
process  in  evolution  should  not  1)C  taken  as  a  philoso- 


DEFINiriOX  AXD  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  61 

phy  of  the  whole  ;  a  similarity  in  the  process  in  different 
departments  need  not  be  identity.  It  should  be  con- 
sidered that  evolution  involves  something  that  is 
evolved,  and  that  on  this,  not  merely  on  the  environ- 
ment, the  result  depends.  No  environment  can  evolve 
an  oak  from  a  mushroom. 

Evolution  accounts  for  much  which  was  formerly 
attributed  to  design;  but  this  is  different  from  the 
problem  whether  it  dispenses  with  design  altogether, 
or  is  itself  the  product  and  manifestation  of  design. 
If  at  the  end  of  a  certain  process  of  evolution,  in  man, 
we  have  mind  which  works  teleologically,  then  the 
conditions  for  producing  that  mind  must  exist  in  the 
universe.  No  matter  what  process  is  adopted,  we  can 
get  from  an  object  only  what  is  in  it  in  some  form. 
One  of  the  ul'iimate  of  the  fundamental  questions  not 
settled  by  evolution  is  this;  Is  there  involved  in  the 
process  mind  in  the  beginning  as  well  as  at  the  end?  ^ 

1  Haeckel,  "Evolution  of  Man,"  i.  95  :  "The  gist  of  Darwin's  theory, 
properly  so  called,  is  this  simple  idea :  that  the  struggle  for  existence  in 
Nature  evolves  new  Species  without  Design,  just  as  the  Will  of  ^fan  produces 
new  Varieties  in  Cultivation  irith  Design."  Darwin  discusses  the  subject  in 
"  The  Origin  of  Species,"  cliapters  iii.  and  iv.  On  the  present  limita- 
tions of  the  theory  of  selection,  Riehl  ("  The  Principles  of  the  Critical 
Philosophy,"  322)  says  :  "  It  is  too  easy  to  forget  that  tlie  tlieory  of  selec- 
tion does  not  attempt  to  explain  t!ie  origin  of  life,  but  the  descent  of 
species,  the  existence  of  which  presupposes  life.  And  when  the  statement 
is  added  that  up  to  date  the  principle  of  transition  from  the  one-celled 
being  to  the  organism  composed  of  several  cells  has  not  yet  been  dis- 
covered, the  limits  of  present  biological  investigation  have  been  given;  it 
is  not,  however,  justifiable  to  treat  these  as  limits  for  the  future  progress 
of  the  science."  On  p.  324  he  says  :  "  At  most,  natural  science  could  only 
approve  of  teleology  as  a  mode  of  thought  which  has  reference  to  the  ori- 
gin of  things.  But  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  occupy  itself  with  the  fiual 
reasons  of  things,  but  rather  witli  the  relative  beginnings  and  the  develop- 
ment of  phenomena,  it  leaves  to  metaphysics  the  question  whether  exist- 
ence in  general  involves  design,  whether  tlie  woi-ld  taken  as  a  whole  is  to 
be  thought  of  as  teleological," 


62       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

But  the  extensive  sociological  application  of  evo- 
lution as  formulated  bj  Darwin  is  evident.  It  is 
significant  that  Darwin  was  indebted  to  the  reading  of 
a  work  on  human  society  for  a  clear  conception  of  the 
theory,  — namely,  Malthus'  "  Principles  of  Population." 

It  is  beyond  question  that  in  the  struggle  for  exist- 
ence great  modifications  take  place  in  human  society. 
The  struggle  itself  promotes  development  and  modifies 
individuals  and  their  associations;  the  fittest  survive 
and  transmit  their  qualities  to  their  descendants.  It 
is  not,  however,  the  only  law  in  social  evolution,  nor 
docs  it  in  men  with  reason  and  design  work  in  the  same 
way  as  in  the  lower  animals.  Darwin  by  no  means 
claims  to  explain  everything  by  natural  selection, 
acknowledging  "plainly  our  ignorance  of  the  cause  of 
each  particular  variation. "  ^ 

4.  The  part  taken  by  psychology  in  Sociology  requires 
consideration.  Just  what  is  meant  by  the  statement 
that  Sociology  is  a  psychological  discipline  or  is  based 
on  psychology,  should  be  explained.  It  needs  no  proof 
that  all  science  and  all  knowledge  are  mental,  depend 
on  the  laws  of  the  mind,  and  therefore  arc  based  on 
psychology.  Our  biological  conceptions  are  no  less 
dependent  on  psychological  laws  than  our  logic.  All 
departments  of  thought  are  therefore  equal  in  that  they 
are  mental  products. 

If  by  the  statement  that  Sociology  rests  on  psychology 
is  meant  that  the  mind  is  the  one  object  of  sociological 
inquiry,  then  we  demur.  In  Sociology  we  consider  the 
mind  and  the  body,  and  even  the  natural  environment 
so  far  as  it  affects  society.  Thus  psycho-])hysics  rather 
than  psychology  is  the  object  of  sociological  inquiry. 
Still  more  objectionable  is  psychology  as  the  object  of 

1  Origin  of  Species,  106, 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  63 

Sociology  if  mind  is  taken  in  the  sense  of  intellect 
merely.  We  must  include  in  mind  the  emotions  and 
the  will  likewise.  It  may  be  well  at  times  to  empha- 
size the  intellect,  the  emotions,  or  the  will,  as  specially 
involved  in  certain  sociological  processes.  Here  thought 
and  foresight  may  be  especially  concerned ;  there  feel- 
ing with  its  impulses;  yonder  will  with  its  activities. 
Analysis  has  prevailed  in  psychology  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  divide  the  mind  into  numerous  faculties,  each  of 
which  was  then  discussed  as  if  it  had  a  separate  exist- 
ence. The  result  was  false  abstractions;  the  connec- 
tion of  the  faculties  was  lost  sight  of,  as  well  as  the 
unity  of  the  mind.  Chiefly  through  the  influence  of 
Herbart  was  the  tendency  promoted  to  overcome  this 
false  abstraction  and  treat  the  mind  as  a  unit.  It  is 
the  same  mind  that  is  involved,  whatever  faculty  may 
be  exercised.  Intellect,  feeling,  and  will  are  organi- 
cally united  and  never  can  be  absolutely  severed  from 
one  another.  There  may  be  a  question  of  dominance ; 
thei-e  can  be  none  of  complete  separation  or  of  the 
isolated  action  of  one  without  the  other. 

In  another  aspect  the  relation  of  psychology  to  Soci- 
ology is  important.  If  a  psychology  has  to  be  adapted 
to  a  theory  of  evolution,  it  is  in  danger  of  losing  its 
independence;  the  resuUs  of  the  inquiry  are  apt  to  be 
a  foregone  conclusion.  The  mind  ought  to  be  examined 
thoroughly  as  it  is,  not  what  it  must  be  if  certain  evo- 
lutionary hypotheses  are  true.  Least  of  all  is  psychol- 
ojiy  to  be  prepared  with  a  view  to  determine  Sociology. 
The  sociologist  can  leave  to  psychology  its  peculiar 
province,  the  mental  phenomena  and  laws.  Psychology 
starts  with  a  prejudice  if  limited  to  mental  changes 
as  affected  by  the  environment.  The  mind  enslaved  by 
its   environment  loses  sight  of  its  inherent  energies. 


64       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  conviction  that  it  is  thus  tethered  robs  it  of  its 
spontaneity  and  freedom  of  exercise.  A  Sociology 
based  on  a  psychology  which  depends  on  the  natural 
environment  is  in  danger  of  limiting  society  to  natural 
forces.  Whether  this  tethering  of  the  mind  be  due  to 
materialism,  to  the  view  that  mental  processes  are 
physical,  or  to  some  other  monistic  hypothesis,  it  is 
surely  not  wise  for  a  beginner  to  adopt  it  as  a  dogma. 
From  the  mind  the  mind  mnst  be  learned.  The  saying 
of  Leibnitz  should  be  remembered.  When  confronted 
by  a  shallow  sensationalism  with  the  old  dictum,  that 
nothing  is  in  the  mind  which  was  not  before  in  the 
senses,  he  added,  "Except  the  mind  itself. "^  That  is, 
the  mind  itself  must  be  taken  into  account,  its  energy, 
its  laws,  not  merely  what  impressions  it  receives 
through  the  senses.  The  severe  limitation  of  mind  to 
its  environment  and  sense-impressions  has  indeed  been 
lauded  as  pre-eminently  scientific.  It  has  also  been 
claimed  that  this  dominance  of  the  sensational  element 
has  gained  victory  on  victory  in  recent  times.  This 
boast  is  likely  to  be  short-lived.  There  has,  for  some 
decades,  been  an  unusual  emphasis  on  the  environment, 
partly  due  to  past  neglect  of  this  important  feature, 
partly  to  the  depreciation  of  philosophy  and  to  the 
predominance  of  natural  science.  But  a  strong  re- 
action has  already  set  in.  The  mind  has  claims  which 
cannot  be  permanently  suppressed.  It  elaborates, 
analyzes,  and  synthesizes,  according  to  its  inherent 
laws,  the  impressions  received  from  the  surroundings. 
The  mind  itself  is  the  immediate  environment  of 
thought.  General izntions.  abstractions,  the  drawing 
of  laws  from  phenomena,  the  formation  of  ideals,  such 
as   beauty,   truth,    goodness,    and    the   construction   of 

^  "  Nisi  intellectus." 


DEFINITION  AND   SCOPE    OF  SOCIOLOGY.  60 

systems,  all  reveal  mind  as  not  tethered  to  the  environ- 
ment or  to  phenomena.  Some  may  value  mental  prod- 
ucts only  if  they  are  proved  natural  products  and  serve 
to  adjust  the  mind  to  its  environment;  but  there  are 
others  who  study  the  mind  itself  in  its  mental  products, 
for  the  purpose  of  understanding  the  mind,  just  as  they 
study  natural  phenomena  for  the  purpose  of  understand- 
ing nature. 

Among  the  greatest  and  most  perplexing  of  psycho- 
logical problems  is  that  of  the  freedom  of  the  will. 
The  beginner  cannot  be  expected  to  delay  his  sociologi- 
cal investigations  till  the  problem  is  solved.  He  can 
leave  it  safely  to  the  discipline  to  which  it  belongs, 
without  interfering  seriously  with  his  sociological 
studies. 

5.  Theological  questions  can  be  left  to  theology. 
The  fact  that  they  have  been  so  largely  drawn  into 
Sociology  has  greatly  interfered  with  the  free  and  full 
development  of  this  subject.  Not  on  Sociology  itself 
do  the  atheistic,  agnostic,  or  theistic  conceptions 
depend,  but  on  its  presuppositions.  Those  who  come 
to  Sociology  with  materialism,  or  with  a  certain  theory 
of  evolution,  or  with  theism,  naturally  make  their  pre- 
suppositions the  laws  according  to  which  social  phe- 
nomena are  shajied.  If  Sociolotjy  has  thus  far  been 
tainted  with  materialism  and  agnosticism,  it  is  due  to 
the  fact  that  its  development  has  been  left  to  mate- 
rialists and  agnostics.  Religion  and  ethics  should  be 
considered  as  social  elements  or  forces,  without  bias, 
exactly  as  all  other  phenomena. 

In  thus  trying  to  fix  its  scope,  the  purpose  is  to  give 
Sociology  its  own  place,  and  separate  it  from  entangle- 
ment with  other  subjects,  to  which  it  is  now  so  liable. 
In  the  beginning  of  a  now  discipline   chaos   may  be 

5 


66       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

inevitable;  the  discipline  itself  has  yet  to  be  found  and 
correlated.  The  confusion  becomes  still  greater  when 
Sociology  is  so  vague  and  comprehensive  that  men  can 
make  it  the  repository  of  all  their  hypotheses  and 
theories  of  chance  and  fatalism,  of  matter  and  spirit, 
of  biological  and  cosmical  evolution.  The  profound 
and  systematic  thinker  will  at  least  make  an  effort  to 
differentiate  Sociology  from  the  other  disciplines,  and 
to  give  to  each  its  special  scope  and  problems. 

This  is  written  for  the  sociological  beginner,  not  for 
sociological  specialists.  He  should  be  encouraged  to 
inquire  into  the  ultimate  problems,  but  in  their  proper 
place.  He  is  not  to  confound  Sociology  with  natural 
science,  with  metaphysics,  with  general  philosophy,  or 
with  theology.  His  study  of  Sociology  is  to  be  for  the 
sake  of  mastering  society,  not  for  the  sake  of  any  theory 
of  the  universe,  of  design,  of  volition,  or  anything  else 
than  society.  Perhaps  after  he  has  grasped  society 
itself  he  can  form  a  better  conception  of  problems 
related  to  society  but  not  directly  involved  in  it. 

It  need  not  be  emphasized  that  the  above  does  not 
interfere  with  the  recognition  of  laws  in  humanity 
and  in  the  uniformity  of  their  operations.  How  far 
these  laws  are  within  our  reach  is  another  matter,  and 
has  to  be  determined  by  the  actual  investigation.  But 
every  honest  inquirer  must  refuse  to  postulate  certain 
laws  where  their  existence  has  not  been  established, 
and  to  transfer  laws  from  a  department  where  their 
prevalence  is  evident  to  departments  where  their  opera- 
tion is  not  proved  and  their  application  doubtful. 

The  study  of  Sociology  presupposes  luucli  preparatory  training. 
When  it  comes  in  a  university  course,  it  is  preceded  by  a  liberal 
education.  In  that  case  there  is  no  need  of  repeating  in  sociologi- 
cal  inquiry  what  has  already  been  learned  in  the  study  of  the 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  67 

natural  sciences,  psychology,  and  philosophy.  The  very  fact  that 
Sociology  is  then  taken  up  implies  that  to  the  other  subjects  soci- 
ological studies  are  now  to  be  added,  and  that  the  attention  is  to 
be  concentrated  on  human  society.  Sociology  will  be  more  strictly 
limited  to  its  scope  when  its  place  in  a  collegiate  or  university 
course  has  been  definitely  fixed  and  its  relation  to  other  studies 
determined. 

The  sociologist  no  leas  than  other  specialists  should  have  the 
benefits  of  the  division  of  labor.  Indeed  he  is  specially  in  need  of 
them,  because  his  department  is  so  new  and  undeveloped.  Other 
investigators  likely  surpass  him  in  their  specialties,  just  as  he  is 
supposed  to  surpass  them  in  his  own.  In  the  spirit  of  co-operation 
they  should  work  for  him,  and  he  for  them.  So  extensive  have 
the  different  departments  of  thought  become  that  specialization  is 
necessary  for  the  most  successful  M'ork.  With  a  thorough  liberal 
education  as  his  general  basis,  the  specialist  looks  to  investigators 
in  other  departments  for  facts,  laws,  and  principles,  which  he  needs 
but  cannot  himself  make  a  specialty  of.  If  some  of  his  requu'e- 
ments  are  not  met  in  this  way,  he  may  himself  be  obliged  to  make 
special  investigations  in  the  specialties  of  others.  It  has  been  said 
that  since  the  day  of  A.  von  Humboldt  no  scientist  has  been  able 
to  master  all  departments  of  science  ;  they  have  become  too  vast 
for  that.  Even  when  Humboldt  gave  his  "  Cosmos  "  to  the  world 
specialists  were  advanced  beyond  some  of  its  teachings,  just  as 
specialists  had  passed  beyond  certain  doctrines  of  Comte's  "  Posi- 
tive Philosophy  "  before  it  was  completed.  There  may  now  be 
generalizations  on  the  basis  of  all  the  sciences,  because  the  prin- 
ciples are  taken  from  the  investigations  of  different  specialists  ; 
but  no  scholar  can  be  a  successful  specialist  in  all  the  sciences. 

Recognizing  this  division  of  labor,  the  sociologist  is  expected  to 
devote  himself  to  his  specialty,  just  as  others  devote  themselves  to 
their  particular  departments.  He  may  be  a  specialist  in  some  other 
sphere  before  he  becomes  a  sociologist,  —  in  natural  science,  in 
psychology,  ethics,  economics,  politics,  law,  philosophy,  or  theology, 
—  in  which  case  he  will  bring  to  Sociology  the  advantages,  perhaps 
also  disadvantages,  of  his  former  specialty.  It  may  under  such 
circumstances  be  impossible  for  him  to  resist  the  temptation  to  give 
his  Sociology  the  peculiar  coloring  of  his  past  specialization.  This 
will  be  overcome  when  the  various  social  studies  lead  up  to,  and 
become  the  basis  of,  Sociology. 


68       INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

At  present,  using  Lis  own  studies  as  a  basis,  the  sociological 
specialist  must  look  to  other  scholars  as  co-operators.  Not  only 
does  he  regard  specialists  in  natural  science,  particularly  in  biology, 
as  co-laborers,  but  also  such  as  work  in  the  various  humanistic 
studies.  He  gratefully  accepts  the  rich  contributions  to  his  spe- 
cialty by  ethnologists,  anthropologists,  psychologists,  philosophers, 
historians,  economists,  political  writers,  moralists,  and  theologians. 
While  the  sociologist  sustains  relations  to  specialists  in  all  dej^art- 
ments  and  looks  to  them  for  help,  nothing  in  the  human  sciences 
is  to  be  foreign  to  him.  Whatever  of  hunianity  is  accessible 
should  be  concentrated  on  his  specialty  for  the  development  of 
Sociology. 

Even  in  his  own  department  he  is  obliged  to  specialize ;  all  social 
affairs  do  not  equally  concern  him.  The  significant  is  most  valu- 
able; what  is  principiant,  tyi^ical,  essential,  interpretive,  causative. 
Unless  there  is  this  si^ecialization,  lie  will  find  his  sphere  too  large 
and  the  materials  beyond  his  comprehension.  Under  great  social 
characteristics  the  sociologist  groups  all  that  is  social. 

Perhaps  Sociology  requires  time  in  order  that  it  may  be  suffi- 
ciently differentiated  fi'om  other  disciplines  to  sharply  outline  its 
particular  sphere  and  confine  it  to  the  same.  The  confusion  in 
Sociology  seems  now  similar  to  that  which  formerly  prevailed  in 
philosophy,  to  which  at  different  times  all  deeper  and  systematic 
knowledge  was  assigned ;  the  result  at  last  being  that  the  term 
stood  for  so  much  in  general  that  it  had  no  definite  meaning. 

The  student  who  clearly  apprehends  the  subject-matter  of  Soci- 
ology will  discover  that  it  requires  the  concentration  of  all  his 
energies.  So  profound  and  so  vast  is  the  theme  that  he  will  be  able 
to  account  for  wandering  into  forl)idden  paths  only  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  subject-matter  has  been  missed  and  with  it  the  scope 
of  Sociology,  or  that  through  some  mistaken  notion  sociological 
inquiries  are  used  to  promote  pet  theories  lugged  in  from  other 
specialties. 

When  sweeping  generalizations  threaten  to  make  an  indiscrimi- 
nate mass  of  heterogeneous  elements,  it  is  time  to  insist  that 
humanity  be  studied  in  man,  not  in  the  brute.  Particularly  are 
we  limited  to  human  consciousness  for  all  that  is  purely  subjective, 
such  as  ethical  considerations.  Tt  is  admitted  to  be  extremely 
difFiciilt  for  one  human  mind  to  interpret  the  motives  of  another. 
We  cannot  enter  another  mind,  but  judge  it  only  by  outward  ex- 


DEFINITION  AND  SCOPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.         69 

pressions,  which  may  be  defective.  We  judge  other  minds  only 
through  our  own  experiences.  AVhoever  considers  this  fact  will 
hesitate  to  treat  animal  conduct  as  the  key  to  human  ethics.  Two 
men  may  do  the  same  things  which  must  be  differently  interpreted 
if  their  motives  are  taken  into  account.  The  action  of  animals 
may  look  like  that  of  men  and  yet  be  totally  different.  Until  we 
can  put  ourselves  in  place  of  monkeys,  dogs,  and  horses,  we  are 
justified  in  questioning  the  ethical  characteristics  ascribed  to  them. 
It  is  astonishing  that  in  data  of  ethics  claiming  to  be  scientific, 
facts  loosely  gathered  and  without  scientific  method  are  confi- 
dently interpreted  according  to  preconceived  notions. 

The  failure  to  sei:)arate  Sociology  sharply  from  other  disciplines 
has  led  to  such  confusion  as  to  interfere  with  its  recognition  ami 
development.  So  clear  a  thinker  as  Lorenz  von  Stein  declared 
that  it  had  always  been  impossible  for  him  to  form  a  conception  of 
Sociology,  "  since,  according  to  the  French  and  English  confusion 
of  words,  nothing  any  longer  exists  which  is  not  in  some  sense 
Sociology,  electricity  and  bacteria  included."  ^ 

This  tendency  to  wander  about  creation,  to  follow  cosmical  pro- 
cesses, to  trace  biological  laws,  to  transmute  physical  into  intellec- 
tual and  moral  forces,  and  to  interpret  man  by  the  lower  animals, 
would  be  more  excusable  if  the  legitimate  materials  of  Sociology 
had  been  exhausted.  So  far,  however,  is  this  from  being  the  case 
that  hardly  a  beginning  has  been  made  to  collect  and  systematize 
them.  Not  only  are  these  materials  so  definite  that  they  can  easily 
be  distinguished  from  others,  but  they  are  so  important  as  to 
deserve  the  undivided  energies  of  specialists.  Hardly  any  other 
demand  is  more  urgent  than  that  the  attention  be  concentrated  on 
phenomena  known  to  be  sociological,  in  order  that  they  may  be 
tlioroughly  mastered. 

Our  very  speech  shows  that  the  common  consciousness  does  not 
limit  society  to  organizations  and  institutions.  When  we  speak  of 
a  question  as  a  social  problem,  we  mean  that  it  is  a  question  not 
of  any  particular  organization,  but  of  society  at  large.  We  say  that 
society  makes  criminals,  and  mean  society  itself,  not  a  particular 
kind  of  society.  We  take  society  as  a  totality  when  we  declare 
society  responsible  for  slums,  for  saloons,  for  gambling,  and  for 
other  evils.  By  the  social  condition  of  a  people  we  mean  all  that 
pertains  to  the  people  as  forming  a  community,  including  their 

1  Quoted  by  Gumplowicz  in  "Sociolopcie  und  Politik." 


70       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

organizations  and  institutions.  When  in  England  and  on  the 
Continent  men  emphasize  the  need  of  social  politics,  they  mean 
that  political  action  should  be  based  on  the  actual  situation  of  the 
people.  That  society  is  not  limited  to  organizations  and  institu- 
tions, but  is  an  organism  which  includes  these  and  much  more,  is 
an  achievement  of  modern  thought  and  one  of  the  strongest 
impulses  to  sociological  inquiries. 

The  student  naturally  approaches  society  in  the  largest  sense 
through  the  study  of  social  groups.  Every  such  group  contains  all 
the  elements  which  are  essential  to  society.  The  social  groups, 
their  relations  to  one  another,  and  the  grand  social  totality  they 
form,  are  all  within  the  scope  of  Sociology. 

The  direct  social  action  of  an  individual  is  on  the  groups  to 
which  he  belongs,  the  family,  the  neighborhood,  the  community, 
and  the  various  organizations  of  which  he  is  a  member.  The  action 
is  apt  to  be  intensive  in  proportion  to  the  smallness  of  the  group. 

Much  of  the  social  influence  of  the  day  consists  in  the  actions 
of  groups  on  one  another.  In  religion  we  have  the  churches  and 
numerous  religious  organizations ;  in  politics,  parties  and  factions ; 
in  the  industries,  combinations  of  capitalists  and  of  laborers ;  like- 
wise associations  for  literary,  scientific,  artistic,  and  other  purposes. 
Whatever  cause  enlists  the  symjjathies  of  men  leads  to  organiza- 
tion, without  which  there  is  little  hope  of  success  even  for  the  most 
commendable  objects.  Thus,  besides  individual  action,  we  behold 
that  of  groups  and  combinations  of  groups  in  all  departments  of 
life. 

This  interaction  of  groups  affords  an  interesting  study  and  exerts 
a  powerful  effect  on  social  development.  Men  are  apt,  as  we  say, 
to  lose  themselves  in  groups,  to  partake  of  their  characteristics 
and  prejudices,  and  to  sacrifice  individuality.  They  must  belong 
to  parties  to  accomplish  their  purposes,  and  therefore  give  them- 
selves to  the  parties.  Where  the  majority  rules,  independent 
inquii'y  and  individual  conviction  may  have  little  weight.  When 
men  move  in  herds,  we  have  "voting  cattle."  Public  opinion, 
however  worthless,  subjects  citizens  of  republics  to  abject  slavery. 
"  One  might  as  well  be  out  of  the  world  as  out  of  fashion." 
Shrewd  men  who  appreciate  the  power  of  groups  and  associate 
action  seek  so  to  use  them  as  to  gain  control  of  pai'ties  and  con- 
ventions. Hence  bosses  in  politics,  and  the  methods  of  political 
machinery  even  in  religious  conventions. 


DEFINITION  AND  6CUPE   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  71 

lu  the  study  of  social  activity  it  is  important  to  distinguish 
between  the  influence  of  persons  and  of  things.  Men  personally 
weak  and  even  contemptible  may  be  socially  powerful  on  account 
of  rank  and  position  (monarchs,  the  nobility,  politicians),  or  on 
account  of  wealth.  Title,  place,  and  money  may  have  power 
where  scholarship  and  character  count  for  little.  With  vast  multi- 
tudes display  gains  the  victory  over  solid  worth.  It  is  consequently 
of  great  significance  in  social  study  to  determine  what  forces  con- 
trol communities.  Later  we  shall  see  that  it  is  essentially  the  social 
forces  which  constitute  the  scope  of  sociological  inquiry. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Exact  Aim  and  Scope  of  Sociology.  Society  as  com- 
posed of  Individuals,  Social  Groups,  and  Humanity.  Why 
include  the  Primitive  Social  Groups  in  Sociology  ?  Or- 
ganized and  Unorganized  Society.  Analysis  of  a  Social 
Group.  Synthesis  of  Social  Groups.  Pcwrer  of  Social 
Groups.  Social  Groups  and  Individuality.  Subject-Matter 
of  Sociology.  Why  Sociologists  have  not  confined  to  this 
their  Discussions.  Reasons  for  strictly  confining  the  Scope 
of  Sociology  to  its  Subject-Matter.  Relation  of  Sociology 
to  the  Metaphysical  Questions  of  Materialism  and  Spiritual- 
ism. Relation  to  Biology ;  to  Evolution  ;  to  Psychology  ; 
to  Theology  and  Religion. 


72       INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER    III. 

THE    RELATION    OF    SOCIOLOGY    TO    OTHER 
SOCIAL    DISCIPLINES. 

The  Problem.  We  now  have  the  Definition  and  Scope 
of  Socioloyy.  On  human  society  as  the  subject-matter  of 
our  study  the  inquiries  are  to  he  concentrated.  But  there 
were  social  studies  long  before  Sociology  was  thought  of, 
and  there  noiv  exist  specific  social  sciences  ivhich  treat  of 
jjarticidar  phases  of  society.  In  order  to  determine  the 
peculiarity  of  Sociology  it  is  necessary  to  consider  its  rela- 
tion to  other  social  disciplines. 

Sociology  has  not  only  been  declared  unnecessary,  hut 
has  also  been  regarded  as  an  intruder.  Is  there  unoccupied 
territory  for  it,  or  do  other  studies  already  possess  the 
land?  In  order  to  ansiver  this  question  7ve  are  obliged  to 
examine  the  standpoints  from  which  the  specific  social  dis- 
ciplines contemplate  society.  Most  of  all  tvill  it  be  neces- 
sary to  inquire  into  the  social  character  of  the  science  of 
politics,  of  eco7iomics,  and  of  history,  the  subjects  most 
emphasized  as  sufficient  for  social  study  by  those  who  think 
710  peculiar  sphere  left  for  Sociology. 

Coidd  we  perhaps  by  adding  or  grouping  the  various 
social  sciences  already  established  secure  the  advantages 
sought  by  Sociology  ?  If  not,  and  if  Sociology  is  really  a 
neio  science,  ivhat  differentiates  it  from  the  specific  social 
sciences  ? 

The  questions  involved  in  this  chapter  have  not  received 
sufficient  attention.     Much  of  the  confusion  in  Sociology  is 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  73 

due  to  the  fact  that  they  have  not  been  definitely  ansivered. 
In  order  to  determine  relations,  that  discrimination  which 
discerns  both  likeness  and  difference  is  required,  and  then 
due  importance  is  to  be  given  to  each.  We  relate  Sociology 
to  the  social  sciences  for  the  purpose  of  differentiating  it 
from  them. 

May  not  the  social  science  be  related  to  the  social  sciences 
as  society  is  related  to  societies  ? 

In  viewing  from  a  short  distance  a  row  of  three  white 
houses  exactly  alike,  the  middle  one  may  be  seen 
clearly,  hut  not  distinctly.  You  cannot  tell  just  where  it 
ends  and  they  begin ;  it  is  not  seen  distinctly,  because 
it  cannot  be  sharply  distinguished  from  the  other  two. 
It  would  be  distinct  as  well  as  clear  if  the  two  houses 
were  black  while  it  remains  white.  An  object  is  made 
distinct  by  separating  it  from  that  with  which  it  is 
most  closely  allied. 

There  is  special  reason  for  distinguishing  Sociology 
from  the  other  human  disciplines  and  determining 
its  exact  place  among  them.  Questions  have  been 
raised  whether  it  has  a  distinct  place,  whether  its 
sphere  is  not  already  occupied,  or  whether  all  it  has  to 
say  is  not  now  discussed  by  other  disciplines.  Soci- 
ology must  prove  that  it  is  not  an  intruder,  but  has  a 
valid  claim  to  existence. 

Even  if  all  that  belongs  properly  to  Sociology  had 
heretofore  been  included  in  another  subject  or  in 
several,  that  would  be  no  conclusive  objection  to  its 
separation  and  its  development  as  a  distinct  discipline. 
By  this  means  it  will  receive  greater  prominence,  more 
attention  Avill  be  concentrated  on  it,  and  it  will  be 
more  fully  developed.  ]\rathematics  and  the  natural 
sciences  were  long  included  in  philosophy ;  but  in  the 


74        IXTRODUCTIOX  TO   STL'DY  OF  SOCIOLOGT. 

process  of  evolution  thev  became  independent,  and  this 
"vras  to  their  advantage.  Sociology  is  surelv  important 
and  extensive  enough  for  separate  treatment ;  only  as  a 
distinct  department  of  thought  can  the  evolution  it 
deserves  be  expected. 

But  has  anv  other  discipline  included  Sociology,  so 
that  now  we  need  but  take  it  from  that  department  of 
thought  and  give  it  a  separate  existence?  There  never 
has  been  another  discipline  which  included  the  science 
of  society.  But  that  the  need  of  making  human  asso- 
ciation an  object  of  especial  inquiry  was  felt  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  various  disciplines  made  an  attempt 
so  to  enlarge  themselves  as  to  include  society.  This 
is  true  of  political  economy  and  likewise  of  the  science 
of  politics.  But  it  is  evident  that  in  this  way  a  com- 
plete interpretation  of  society  was  impossible.  In  one 
case  society  is  reduced  to  industrialism  and  material 
interests ;  in  the  other  to  a  political  institution.  Soci- 
ology is  needed  in  order  that  every  interest  of  humanity 
may  receive  its  proper  place  and  due  emphasis  in  the 
social  system.  Heretofore  we  have  had  social  sciences, 
but  no  social  science;  that  is.  various  disciplines  have 
discussed  specific  social  themes,  but  no  one  considered 
society  pi?r  8e  and  all  the  social  forces  in  their  organic 
connection.  Analogies  are  seen  in  the  natural  sciences. 
Thus  there  was  a  time  when  groups  of  stars  were 
observed,  but  there  was  no  astronomy;  when  certain 
flowers  and  animals  were  classified,  but  there  was 
neither  botany  nor  zoology ;  and  the  minerals  were  used 
and  the  earth  was  studied  long  before  mineralogy  or 
geology  was  developed. 

Essentially  the  same  process  of  evolation  has  taken  place  in  all 
the  sciences  :  a  few  facts  were  observed,  rude  classifications  were 
made,  things  really  distinct  were  put  together  either  because  there 


THE  RELATION   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  75 

was  a  lack  of  differentiation  in  the  objects  themselves  or  a  lack  of 
discrimination,  and  only  after  a  long  time  did  the  science  itself 
become  jKJSsible.  Hasty  generalization  is  one  of  the  most  fruitful 
sources  of  error.  Growth  in  knowledge  is  largely  a  development 
of  discrimination.  As  thought  advances,  differences  are  discovered 
where  formerly  none  were  observed.  Knowledge  is  twofold  :  analy- 
sis and  synthesis  :  a  recognition  of  distinct  features  and  of  the  unity 
tmderlying  the  differences.  Natural  science  is  at  one  time  an 
undiscriminated  totality;  then  it  branches  into  physics, chemistry, 
biology,  etc.  Shall  this  analytical  process  be  followed  by  a  syn- 
thesis of  all  the  sciences  so  as  to  give  us  a  system  of  the  cosmos  ? 
This  is  conceived  by  some  as  the  aim  of  philosophy  in  our  day. 
We  have  specific  social  sciences  which  involve  most  important 
social  factors,  such  as  political  science  and  economics ;  but  if 
society  itself  is  to  receive  adequate  treatment,  it  must  be  made  a 
distinct  object  of  inquiry. 

eeflectl:>xs. 

Difference  between  Clearness  and  Distinctness.  Distinct- 
ness —  disttneuisMng  between  similar  objects.  Advantages 
of  making  Society  an  Especial  Object  of  Inquiry.  Aim  of 
Analysis  and  Synthesis  in  Scientific  Research.  Importance 
of  Discrimination. 


The    General    Disttn'ction    between    Sociology    and 
THE  Specific  Social  Sciences. 

Sociology  as  the  science  of  society  confines  itself 
strictly  to  human  association.  It  aims  to  show  what 
is  meant  by  association,  how  it  is  brought  about,  to 
what  process  of  development  it  i.s  subject,  and  what 
results  it  produces.  Tliree  questions  respecting  human 
society  are  supreme :  What  ?  Whv  ?  How  ?  Since 
human  association  itself  is  our  aim.  it  is  evident  that 
the  stress  is  not  to  be  placed  on  any  particular  kind  of 
association.     The  subject  is  so  large  that  we  shall  be 


76        ISTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

obliged  to  confine  ourselves  to  the  general  principles  of 
society  and  to  their  general  application. 

In  thus  aiming  at  what  marks  human  association  as 
characteristic,  we  also  aim  at  what  marks  every  par- 
ticular form  of  human  society.  If  personal  forces  are 
the  constituent  elements  of  association,  then  these 
forces  must  constitute  every  kind  of  society  formed. 
The  forces  may  differ  in  kind,  in  number,  in  intensity, 
and  in  degree  of  development ;  but  no  society  can  exist 
otherwise  than  by  virtue  of  these  forces.  The  personal 
forces  exist  only  in  individuals;  therefore  the  idea  of 
society  includes  that  of  individuals  as  possessors  of  the 
social  forces.  In  a  society  for  physical  culture,  for 
mental  culture,  for  political  ends,  and  for  any  purpose 
imaginable,  the  prime  question  pertains  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  personal  forces  involved.  Just  as  being 
includes  all  being,  but  only  in  the  most  general  sense 
as  being,  so  association  includes  every  society,  but 
only  in  its  most  general  sense. 

Here  then  is  the  broad  difference  between  social 
science  itself  and  the  specific  social  sciences :  the 
former  discusses  whatever  belongs  to  society  as  society 
and  applies  the  general  ideas  obtained  to  the  different 
associations;  but  each  special  social  science  confines 
itself  to  a  particular  phase  of  society.  While  Sociology 
deals  with  the  great  principles  or  essences  of  associa- 
tion, and  shows  how  they  apply  to  all  society,  the 
specific  social  sciences  specialize  certain  forms  of  asso- 
ciation and  give  an  account  of  their  specific  character- 
istics. More  details  are  therefore  to  be  expected  in 
the  limited  social  sciences  than  in  the  general  social 
science. 

Let  us  suppose  that  Sociology  gives  a  principiant 
account  of  the  nature  and  working  of  the  social  forces; 


THE  RELATION   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  77 

that  would  be  a  general  interpretation  of  society. 
Among  them  are  found  industrial  forces;  they  are 
consigned  to  economics  for  special  treatment;  there 
are  also  political  forces;  they  arc  consigned  to  political 
science;  there  arc  ethical  forces,  which  are  consigned 
to  ethics;  and  so  with  all  the  other  social  forces. 
Sociology  is  therefore  the  general  social  science  of 
which  the  special  social  sciences  are  differentiations; 
it  is  the  genus  of  which  they  are  the  species,  the  trunk 
on  which  they  are  the  branches.  While  each  social 
science  has  its  specific  sphere  (the  operation  of  specific 
social  forces),  it  is  not  within  the  province  of  any  one 
of  them  to  determine  what  association  itself  is  and  how 
the  various  forms  of  society  are  related  to  it;  that  is 
the  mission  of  the  more  general  science,   Sociology. 

After  indicating  the  general  relation  of  Sociology  to 
the  special  social  disciplines,  we  now  proceed  to  con- 
sider the  relation  of  some  of  the  latter  to  our  subject. 

Minds  disciplined  in  philosophy  are  not  likely  to  find  difficulty  in 
distinguishing  between  what  is  general  and  what  is  particular,  the 
very  distinction  here  made.  If  aesthetics  is  the  science  of  beauty, 
then  it  seeks  to  formulate  the  general  laws  of  beauty ;  these  laws 
apply  to  every  beautiful  object  wherever  found.  Yet  besides  a 
work  on  these  general  laws,  there  may  be  others  on  specific  de- 
partments of  beauty,  as  on  architecture,  painting,  sculpture,  and 
literature.  Were  the  sphere  of  ?psthetics  so  small  that  all  its 
objects  could  be  treated  by  a  single  discipline,  then  specialization 
might  not  be  necessary.  But  as  subjects  develop,  a  division  into 
general  and  specific  departments  becomes  necessary.  Thus  in 
botany  and  zoology  we  have  the  general  principles  of  plants  and 
animals,  and,  besides  these,  numerous  works  on  special  families 
and  classes  of  plants  and  animals.  We  have  a  history  of  the  world, 
and  distinct  from  it  the  history  of  the  various  nations.  So  in 
Sociology  we  have  an  interpretation  of  association,  and  in  the 
special  social  sciences  discussions  of  the  family,  economic  organiza- 
tions, the  church,  the  state. 


78       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

REFLECTIONS. 

"Why  not  discuss  in  Sociology  all  Social  Forms  both  in 
Principle  and  Detail  ?  "What  pertains  to  the  General  Science 
of  Society  -which  is  not  found  in  the  Special  Social  Sciences? 
What  do  the  Special  Social  Sciences  contain  that  is  not 
found  in  the  General  Science  ?  The  Need  of  General  and 
Specific  Disciplines  illustrated  by  Philosophy,  Science,  and 
History. 

Political  Science. 

Various  limited  societies  have  tried  to  absorb  society 
itself  and  put  themselves  in  its  place.  In  the  gens  or 
the  tribe,  as  an  enlarged  family,  it  is  the  family  which 
embodies  the  social  idea.  Perhaps  the  members  knew 
no  other  association.  In  Judaism  and  the  Middle  AgPij 
the  theocracy,  the  Kingdom  of  God,  or  the  church  is 
viewed  as  the  essence  of  society.  We  can  understand 
why  Aristotle  defines  man  as  a  political  animal,  when 
we  remember  how  the  individual  was  thought  to  exist 
for  the  state. 

A  part  is  put  for  the  whole.  It  is  a  common  mis- 
take to  concentrate  the  attention  on  a  dominant  or 
specially  prized  feature  and  lose  sight  of  the  rest. 
Thus  a  fixed  idea  is  made  the  sole  idea. 

We  have  seen  that  the  development  of  society  beyond 
the  political  sphere  was  the  condition  for  a  larger 
conception  of  society.  For  us  the  state  is  but  an  arc 
in  the  social  circle.  Such  an  exclusive  prominence 
may,  however,  still  be  given  to  the  state  as  to  make  it 
difficult  for  independent  or  voluntary  associations  to 
receive  recognition,  or  to  be  deemed  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance to  justify  social  science  as  distinct  from  politics. 
"What  is  left  for  Sociology  in  such  cases  when  the  state 
al)sorbs  fhe   church,   regulates  the   family,  and  deter- 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  79 

mines  the  limits  of  associative  action  ?  By  making 
the  state  everything,  other  societies  become  nothing. 
Governments  have  at  times  been  disposed  to  suppress 
voluntary  associations,  for  fear  they  might  interfere 
with  the  prerogatives  of  the  state,  threaten  its  suprem- 
acy, or  endanger  its  very  existence.  A  governmental 
paternalism  which  aims  so  to  control  the  affairs  of 
the  people  that  there  may  be  no  occasion  for  inde- 
pendent associative  action,  hinders  the  organization  of 
voluntary  societies.  Thus  associations  distinct  from 
the  state  require  a  certain  degree  of  prominence  and 
importance  in  order  to  receive  recognition  and  to 
deserve  special  treatment.  In  the  very  condition  of 
society  a  reason  is  found  for  those  historians  who  have 
made  history  consist  chiefly  of  the  state,  its  monarchs 
and  officials,   its  diplomacy  and  its  wars. 

While  we  thus  understand  the  exclusive  attention  to 
the  state  as  the  most  perfect  organization,  yet  through- 
out history,  and  particularly  in  modern  times,  we  find 
numerous  open  and  secret  associations  which  are  not 
included  in  political  science.  This  is  the  more  evident 
now  since  the  conception  of  society  has  been  enlarged 
to  include  all  kinds  of  association,  not  merely  formal 
organizations.  Even  in  its  largest  sense  the  state  can- 
not embrace  all  societies  as  constituent  parts  of  the 
body  politic.  From  the  political  forces  numerous  other 
social  energies  must  be  differentiated.  The  action  of 
some  of  these  the  state  may  sanction  by  its  laws ;  the 
action  of  others  may  be  left  free,  neither  requiring  nor 
receiving  recognition. 

Society  existed  before  the  state  was  formed ;  in  what 
sense  would  that  society  be  included  in  political 
science  ?  Then,  we  have  not  one  state  ])ut  many  states, 
and  the  inclusion  of  all  requires  a  science  of  interna- 


80        INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

tional  politics.  But  would  such  a  comprehensive 
science  include  all  non-political  associations  and  the 
whole  of  humanity  ?  Some  organizations,  as  churches, 
Masonic  and  other  lodges,  industrial  societies,  extend 
beyond  the  limits  of  a  state  or  even  of  all  states,  reach- 
ing out  to  individuals  and  tribes  not  in  a  state.  How 
can  these  be  made  a  part  of  political  science  ? 

The  science  of  politics  needs  differentiation  from 
Sociology  and  the  other  social  sciences,  in  order  that 
its  own  peculiar  sphere  may  be  made  more  distinct. 
The  function  of  the  state  is  among  the  most  momentous 
problems  of  the  times;  but  this  function  can  be  dis- 
tinctly brought  out  only  when  contrasted  with  the  other 
social  forces.  In  Russia  the  government  aims  to  make 
society ;  in  the  United  States  society  makes  the  govern- 
ment; in  Russia  the  progress  of  voluntary  association 
is  a  menace  to  the  government;  in  the  United  States 
independent  organizations  may  ignore  the  very  exist- 
ence of  the  government.  Neither  theoretically  nor 
practically  is  there  agreement  respecting  the  limits  of 
the  state  and  its  relation  to  voluntary  associations. 

The  science  of  politics  confines  itself  to  the  state, 
explaining  its  structure  and  functions,  marking  the 
peculiarity  of  its  organization  as  distinguished  from 
other  societies,  treating  of  the  relations  of  the  citizens 
to  one  another  and  to  the  state,  and  of  the  government 
to  the  governed,  the  constitution  and  laws,  and  all  that 
belongs  to  the  domain  of  national  life.  Some  have 
questioned,  as  intimated  above,  whether  the  state 
ought  to  be  included  in  Sociology  or  treated  separately 
as  outside  of  society.  It  is  unquestionably  a  form  of 
association,  and  therefore  within  the  scope  of  Sociology; 
])ut  it  is  only  one  of  many  social  forms,  and  therefore 
j)olitical  science  cannot  take  the  place  of  the  science  of 


THE  RELATION  OE  SOCIOLOGY.  81 

society.  The  distinctive  elements  in  the  state,  the 
peculiar  authority  it  exercises,  and  the  vast  impor- 
tance of  the  subject  must  receive  full  recognition.  Its 
sphere  is  that  of  collective  authority  and  coercion;  the 
sphere  of  other  societies  is  that  of  co-operation.  Owing 
to  the  importance  and  extent  of  politics,  it  has  become 
a  special  science.  It  is,  however,  a  social  science, 
which  indicates  its  intimate  relation  to  Sociology.  The 
state  of  the  people  is  society  in  a  truer  sense  than 
when  the  state  is  treated  as  an  abstraction,  or  as  a 
power  hovering  over  the  people,  to  which  unconditional 
submission  is  required.  We  can  indeed  distinguish 
between  social  and  political,  referring  the  latter  to  all 
that  pertains  to  the  state,  and  the  former  to  society  as 
distinct  from  the  state;  but  reflection  shows  that 
political  action  is  social  action  as  organized  in  the 
form  of  collective  authority.  The  state,  whatever  its 
particular  form  and  whoever  exercises  the  authority,  is 
sovereignty.  The  functions  and  limits  of  the  sover- 
eignty are  among  the  most  important  questions  of  the 
day. 

The  state  is  the  authority  of  the  collecti\'ity,  whether  that 
authority  be  seated  in  one  man  as  a  despot,  in  a  chosen  few  as 
noblemen  or  aristocrats,  in  the  male  citizens,  or  in  all  the  inhabi- 
tants of  a  given  age.  Since  the  state  is  the  authority  of  the  col- 
lectivity, all  within  that  collectivity  are  subject  to  the  authority 
within  the  sphere  of  politics.  Many  other  spheres  of  individual 
or  social  life  may  of  course  lie  outside  of  the  limits  of  the  political 
sphere. 

Political  action  is  always  personal,  that  is,  it  is  the  personal 
action  of  (or  for)  the  collectivity  so  far  as  political.  The  making 
and  adoption  of  the  constitution,  the  election  of  the  legislative  and 
executive  officers  in  a  republic,  and  all  acts  of  the  state  are  personal. 
The  personal  factor  appears  no  less  in  a  monarchy  than  in  a  repub- 
lic. "Where  the  power  is  not  concentrated  in  one  person,  but  dif- 
fused throughout  the  collectivity,  the  conception  of  it  is  less  easily 

6 


82       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

apprehended.  Then  the  notion  is  one  of  great  complexity,  as  in 
the  case  of  seventy  million  inhabitants.  Yet  the  purely  politi- 
cal sphere  can  be  grasped,  likewise  the  pm-ely  political  power  of 
the  collectivity.  The  essence  of  the  matter  consists  in  the  fact 
that  in  the  individuals  of  a  nation  we  abstract  the  political  social 
factor  from  all  other  social  factors.  It  thus  becomes  evident  what 
the  relation  of  Sociology  to  political  science  must  be.  It  regards 
the  state  as  social,  and  as  therefore  a  part  of  the  general  social 
organism,  determines  its  place  and  functions  in  that  organism 
(correlates  the  state  to  the  other  social  factors) ,  but  does  not  take 
the  state  by  itself  and  develop  the  science  of  politics.  This  work, 
and  all  particulars  about  the  state,  it  leaves  to  political  science. 

When  the  brightness  of  the  sun  hides  the  stars  by  day,  that 
does  not  prove  their  non-existence.  When  the  state  becomes  so 
great  in  the  estimation  of  thinkers  as  to  absorb  the  attention,  what 
wonder  that  other  social  forms  dwindle  into  insignificance  ?  Still, 
other  forms  may  exist  which  are  important.  But  they  are  ignored, 
and  that  explains  why  Sociology  is  absorbed  by  political  science. 
Particularly  among  statesmen  is  there  a  tendency  to  do  this. 
When,  however,  social  groups  and  voluntary  organizations  become 
so  powerful  and  prominent  as  in  our  day,  a  broader  social  discipline 
than  that  of  political  science  is  required.  The  strong  tendency  of 
social  specialists  to  make  their  sjiecialty  the  test  of  Sociology  will 
be  overcome  in  exact  proiiortion  as  sociologists  are  developed  and 
approach  all  social  subjects  from  the  broad  basis  of  the  science  of 
society. 

Sociology  recognizes  the  great  importance  of  the  state,  its 
uniqueness  of  character  and  functions,  and  its  influence  on  all 
social  forms  and  relations  within  its  borders.  Even  if  we 
specialize  in  the  study  of  the  state  or  some  other  social  form,  the 
living  connection  of  all  associations  so  as  to  constitute  a  great 
organism  must  be  recognized. 

The  theory  of  the  state  deserves  and  receives  marked  attention 
in  our  day  from  scholars.  Sociological  studies  will  give  still  greater 
prominence  to  the  subject.  They  must  consider  the  social  relation 
of  the  state  to  the  societies  within  its  domain  and  also  to  other 
states  (international  law  and  politics).  Various  movements  of  the 
day  emphasize  the  significance  of  the  state  in  social  affairs,  and  it 
is  not  surprising  that  a  new  impulse  has  been  given  to  the  study  of 
political  science.     Conservative  scholars  admit  that  the  theory  of 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  83 

the  state  ought  to  be  reinvestigated  and  further  developed,  and 
powerful  socialistic,  revolutionary,  anarchistic,  and  nihilistic  ten- 
dencies insist  on  the  complete  transformation  or  even  destruction 
of  the  state.  In  various  places  the  social  crisis  is  predominantly 
political.  Among  the  questions  of  special  importance  to  the  student 
ai'e  the  following  :  What  was  the  origin  of  the  state?  What  is  its 
natiu'e ;  that  is,  what  are  the  distinctive  social  forces  whose  inter- 
action constitutes  the  state  ?  What  are  its  functions  ?  How  is  it 
related  to  the  other  social  forces  at  home  and  abroad  ?  What  is 
its  best  form  ?  What  is  its  history  ?  For  the  comprehensive  view 
of  the  sociologist  international  law,  international  politics,  including 
arbitration,  and  the  civilizing  influence  of  states  on  humanity,  have 
peculiar  attractions.  So  far  as  the  collectivity  is  really  expressed 
in  political  action,  the  government  furnishes  an  excellent  test  of  the 
character  and  intelligence  of  the  people. 

On  the  science  of  politics  the  works  of  Bluntschli,  Mohl,  Wool- 
sey,  Woodrow  Wilson,  Burgess,  and  Sidgwick  are  recommended. 
"  Handworterbuch  der  Staatswisseuschaften,"  six  large  volumes 
and  supplement,  edited  by  Professors  Conrad,  Elster,  Lexis,  and 
Loening,  assisted  by  hundreds  of  scholars  from  different  countries, 
is  the  most  valuable  repository  of  materials  on  all  departments  of 
political  science. 

In  the  first  haK  of  this  century  German  writers  like  Riehl  found 
it  necessary  to  show  that  all  society  is  not  absorbed  by  political 
society.  Professor  von  Treitschke  has  advocated  the  absorption  of 
Sociology  by  political  science.  On  Sociology  as  an  independent 
science  valuable  discussions  are  found  in  the  work  of  Gumplowicz: 
"Sociologie  und  Politik."  This  volume  also  discusses  the  relation 
of  Sociology  to  other  sciences.  Schmidt- Warneck,  in  "  Die  Soci- 
ologie," views  Sociology  cliiefly  in  the  light  of  politics. 

It  is  an  interesting  and  instructive  fact  that  each  class  and  pro- 
fession is  strongly  inclined  to  make  its  particular  view  normative 
for  society.  The  statesman  emphasizes  the  state  ;  the  lawyer  the 
law ;  the  theologian  the  church  ;  the  economist  political  economy ; 
the  capitalist  capital ;  the  laborer  labor ;  the  aristocracy  and 
nobility  the  circle  they  constitute.  Hence  the  inability  of  each  to 
pnt  himself  in  the  place  of  another  or  to  take  a  comprehensive 
view.  What  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  sociological  standpoint, 
which  views  society  as  a  totality,  and  gives  each  particular  class 
and  its  peculiar  view  the  right  place  in  the  social  organism! 


84       INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Origin  of  the  State.  Rousseau's  Social  Contract.  What 
does  the  State  include?  Different  Forms  of  the  State. 
State,  Nation,  Empire.  Relation  betw^een  Constitution,  La-ws, 
Politics.  Eistinction  bet-wreen  State  and  Government.  Legis- 
lative, Judiciary,  Executive  Functions,  -why  separated  and 
how  united  ?  The  work  of  each.  Reasons  for  recent  De- 
velopment of  the  Idea  of  the  State.  Relation  of  the  State  to 
other  Societies.  Source  of  Authority  in  the  State.  The 
Laissez-faire,  the  Paternal,  the  Social  Democratic,  and  the 
Anarchical  Theory  of  the  State.  Grounds  of  Modern  Attacks 
on  the  State.  Arbitration  ;  International  Law  ;  Federation 
of  Nations.  Ranke  :  There  must  be  international  natures  in 
order  to  transplant  the  culture  of  one  land  into  another. 
Patriotism  and  International  Justice.  Value  of  the  Senti- 
ment: My  Country,  right  or  w^rong.  The  Meaning  of  Social 
Politics. 

Political  Economy. 

The  effort  to  make  a  social  science  the  social  science 
has  been  especially  strong  in  political  economy.  So 
long  as  social  science  did  not  exist,  but  its  need  was 
deeply  felt,  it  was  not  strange  that  a  social  study 
deemed  of  supreme  importance  should  be  treated  as  the 
missing  discipline.  Particularly  is  this  exaltation  of 
economics  natural  at  a  time  when  material  interests 
are  absorbing.  Then  political  economy  is  apt  to  be 
regarded  as  not  only  furnishing  the  basis  of  social 
being,  but  as  also  determining  those  interests  which 
pertain  to  social  well-being.  At  such  times  agricul- 
tural, industrial,  and  financial  affairs  are  treated  as 
the  chief  concerns  of  the  state,  as  if,  when  they  are 
attended  to,  all  other  things  will  take  care  of  them- 
selves. It  is  hardly  an  exaggeration  to  affirm  that 
during  the  nineteenth   century  political   economy  has 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  85 

lieen  the  gospel  of  the  leading  industrial  nations,  the 
determining  factor  in  individual  and  social  life.  Men 
have  made  wealth  their  divinity  and  its  pursuit  their 
religion.  Political  economy  is  to  our  age  what  politics 
was  to  Greece  and  Rome,  and  theology  to  the  Middle 
Ages.  And  when  society  passes  from  the  dominant 
political  and  theological  to  the  economic  stage,  what 
wonder  that  political  economy  is  made  the  social 
science  ? 

Carl  Marx,  Friedrich  Engels,  and  the  social  democ- 
racy give  such  an  exclusive  pre-eminence  to  political 
economy  as  to  absorb  in  it  the  state  and  the  whole  of 
society.  It  is  not  strange  that  laborers  whose  exist- 
ence is  an  unceasing  struggle  for  the  necessaries  of 
life  regard  their  industrial  redemption  as  involving 
their  entire  social  salvation.  It  must  also  be  remem- 
bered that  many  students  come  from  political  economy 
as  their  specialty  to  Sociology,  so  that  their  sociological 
theories  are  naturally  affected  by  their  economics. 

Other  factors  have  co-operated  to  reduce  Aristotle's 
"political  animal"  to  an  industrial  animal,  and  to 
transform  the  science  of  economics  into  the  science  of 
society.  The  marvellous  progress  of  natural  science  has 
given  prominence  to  material  interests  and  wonderfully 
stimulated  invention ;  this,  together  with  the  industrial 
development  since  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
has  made  ours  the  era  of  political  economy. 

One  reason  for  creating  social  science  is  found  in 
the  necessity  of  showing  that  man  is  more  than  a  beast 
of  burden  and  has  other  than  material  interests.  The 
new  science  will  relegate  political  economy  to  its  proper 
place.  That  is  at  the  bottom,  the  foundation.  Society, 
in  order  to  live  and  accom]dish  life's  purpose,  must 
have  bread.     We  cannot  build  without  a  foundation, 


86       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

yet  the  foundation  is  not  the  house.  But  the  impor- 
tance of  the  foundation  is  heightened  by  increasing  the 
value  of  the  superstructure.  Political  economy  is  not 
degraded  by  putting  it  at  the  base  instead  of  the  top  of 
society. 

Wheji  political  economy  is  treated  as  an  abstract  discipline,  as 
merely  the  working  of  certain  natural  laws  of  utility  for  the  pro- 
duction of  wealth,  it  can  hardly  claim  to  be  a  social  science.  Dur- 
ing the  last  half-century  this  abstract  method  has  continually  lost 
in  pre-eminence.  The  historic  and  psychological  methods  have 
gained  power,  and  thus  the  human  and  social  factors  have  received 
gi-eater  prominence.  The  result  is  that  now  it  is  regarded  as  not 
only  a  social  science,  but  also,  as  intimated,  an  effort  has  been 
made  to  treat  it  as  the  social  science. 

A  true  social  analj'sis,  which  gives  all  the  social  forces  in  society, 
overcomes  the  tendency  to  absorb  man  in  a  single  interest.  It 
teaches  us  that  there  is  truth,  but  not  the  whole  truth,  in  the 
attempt  of  Aristotle  to  make  man  a  political  animal,  of  Marx  to 
make  him  an  industrial  animal,  of  others  to  reduce  him  to  a  fight- 
ing, a  tool-making,  or  sporting  animal,  and  of  Augustine  to  regard 
him  as  a  spiritual  being.  That  man  is  not  one  of  these,  but  all, 
is  not  disproved  by  the  fact  that  in  some  eras  a  particular  social 
force  has  prevailed  to  the  neglect  or  subordination  of  the  rest. 
Man  is  a  unit  as  well  as  multiplicity ;  some  one  force  can  receive 
an  exclusive  emphasis  and  one-sided  development.  Its  very  exer- 
cise strengthens  it  and  increases  its  supremacy.  But  if  whole  ages 
are  absorbed  by  an  eifort  to  recover  the  holy  grave  from  the  in- 
fidel, is  that  crusade  to  be  deemed  an  interpretation  of  humanity 
itself,  or  only  of  a  particular  phase  of  humanity? 

Sociology  recognizes  the  economic  as  among  the  most  powerful 
of  the  social  forces.  We  can  imagine  Robinson  Crusoe  as  eco- 
nomic in  his  isolation ;  but  as  men  live  in  society  we  consider  the 
social  effects  of  economics.  Man  has  too  many  other  interests  to 
be  absorbed  by  political  economy  ;  but  neither  can  Sociology  take 
the  place  of  economic  science.  It  determines  the  place  of  eco- 
nomics in  the  great  social  system,  but  leaves  to  economics  the 
development  of  the  specific  economic  system. 

Respecting  economics.  Sociology  has  important  functions  in  our 
day.     Tiie  historic  fact  tliat  at  a  particular  time  political  economy 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  87 

is  supreme  does  not  fix  its  place  in  the  social  system  any  more 
than  the  dominance  of  political  science  and  of  ecclesiasticisni  at 
other  times  determined  their  eternal  supremacy.  The  historic 
prevalence  of  a  social  force  does  not  prove  that  it  ought  to  prevail. 
Just  now  there  is  urgent  need  of  determining  the  exact  relation  of 
economics  to  politics,  to  education,  to  religion,  to  ethics,  and  to 
social  reform.  The  abstract  isolation,  and  consequent  one-sided 
development,  of  economics,  help  to  explain  the  practical  mate- 
rialism of  the  age.  A  large  part  of  the  philosophy  of  our  times  is 
interpreted  by  the  effort  to  make  political  economy  the  essence  of 
Sociology.  "While  Sociology  refuses  to  make  industrialism  the 
apex  instead  of  the  base  of  the  social  pyramid,  it  does  not  favor 
the  idealists  and  visionaries  vrho  depreciate  material  interests,  as 
if  there  could  be  an  apex  without  a  base.  However  the  body  may 
be  prized  for  the  sake  of  the  spirit,  we  know  that  in  this  world 
spirits  without  bodies  are  ghosts.  It  is  difficult  to  maintain  the 
golden  mean  of  the  Greeks  between  under-emphasis  on  material 
interests  and  over-emphasis ;  but  it  is  as  important  as  difficult. 

Political  economy  is  of  more  than  ordinary  interest  to  socio- 
logical students.  It  must  be  studied  in  order  to  understand  the 
life  and  history  of  nations,  the  labor  movement  and  the  social 
problem  of  the  day,  and  the  dominant  political  concerns  of  legis- 
lative bodies.  But  it  should  be  studied  in  connection  with  aU 
the  other  social  sciences  or  as  an  integral  part  of  Sociology.  Since 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  its  progress  has  been  great, 
out  of  the  selfish  into  the  social  elements,  passing  fi-om  egoism 
toward  altruism,  enlarging  its  sphere  from  the  economy  of  a  house- 
hold and  a  nation  to  that  of  the  world,  and  rising  from  the  fate  of 
natural  law  to  the  voluntary  agency  of  the  personality,  thus  relat- 
ing the  subject  to  ethical  purpose,  and  showing  that  in  economics 
we  have  an  art  as  well  as  a  science.  This  trend  beyond  Adam 
Smith  and  Ricardo  and  the  entire  old  or  orthodox  economic  school 
is  evident  in  the  thinkers  among  the  economists  of  continental 
Europe,  of  England,  and  of  America. 

As  a  repository  of  the  best  thought  of  eminent  thinkers  on  po- 
litical economy  see :  "  Handbuch  der  Politischen  Oekonomie," 
edited  by  G.  Schoenberg,  third  edition,  three  large  volumes.  An 
excellent  discussion  of  the  economic  function  of  the  state  is  given 
at  the  close  of  A.  Wagner's  "  Grundlagen  der  Volkswirthschaft." 

i\Iany  economists,  particularly  the  Germans,  discuss  the  relation 
of  their  discipline  to  other  social  subjects.     J.  S.  Mill  gives  his 


88        INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

work  the  title,  '•  Principles  of  Political  Economy,  with  some  of 
their  Applications  to  Social  Philosophy."  In  Keynes'  "  Scope  and 
^Method  of  Political  Economy,"  the  fom'th  chapter  is  "  On  the  Rela- 
tion of  Political  Economy  to  General  Sociology."  The  recent 
works  on  economics  by  Marshall,  Walker,  Hadley,  Ely,  and  many 
others  are  well  known  to  students. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Exact  Sphere  of  Political  Economy.  Its  Doctrine  of 
Utility,  of  Value,  of  Wealth.  Gro^wth  of  Economics  from 
that  of  the  Household,  to  that  of  a  Nation,  and  no-w  to 
that  of  the  World.  The  Place  of  Political  Economy  in  Busi- 
ness ;  in  the  State  ;  in  International  Relations.  The  Ortho- 
dox and  the  Modern  School.  Are  the  Industries  entirely 
controlled  by  Natural  Law?  Selfishness  and  Self-Interest 
and  Altruism.  Individualistic  and  Social  Elements  in  Eco- 
nomics. Relation  of  Political  Economy  to  Political  Science. 
To  Ethics.  Fundamental  Character  of  Economics  for  Society. 
Trend  of  Political  Economy  to  become  the  Science  of  So- 
ciety. Some  want  to  relate  Economics  closely  to  Ethics ; 
others  introduce  Ethical  Elements  into  Political  Economy  ; 
others  claim  that  this  is  a  Perversion  of  Economics  :  Will 
not  the  dispute  be  settled  by  giving  Economic  Science  its 
proper  place  in  Sociology  and  thus  relating  it  to  Ethics  and 
all  the  Social  Disciplines?  Political  Economy  as  a  Science 
and  an  Art  (A.  'Wagner).  The  Personal  Element  in  Political 
Economy.  Roscher  :  "  Man  is  the  beginning  and  the  end  of 
our  Science." 

History. 

It  has  been  claimed  that  history  covers  essentially 
the  same  ground  which  Sociology  proposes  to  occupy. 
History,  it  is  said,  deals  with  all  that  is  significant  in 
society  and  has  left  its  impress  on  the  development  of 
humanity,  seeking  to  discover  the  social  forces,  follow- 
ing the  process  of  social  evolution,  and  describing  the 
achievements  of  society,  while  the  individual  is  consid- 
ered  only  so  far  as  he  leaves  a  permanent  effect  on 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  89 

human  thought  and  life.  History  inchides  social 
action,  the  establishment  and  development  of  institu- 
tions, the  course  of  polities,  the  theories  of  political 
economy  prevalent  at  different  times,  and  social  phe- 
nomena in  general.  A  specialty  can  be  made  of  the 
organization  and  evolution  of  society  among  a  particular 
people  or  in  the  world.  But  indispensable  as  history  is 
for  the  student  of  Sociology,  it  cannot  construct  for  him 
a  social  science.  Some  writers  on  Sociology  have 
devoted  so  much  attention  to  the  description  and 
history  of  society  that  the  impression  may  be  made 
that  there  is  little  else  in  the  subject.  The  student  will 
obtain  the  right  point  of  view  by  discriminating  between 
the  aim  of  the  historian  and  that  of  the  sociologist. 
The  former  does  not  propose  to  construct,  but  to 
describe,  systems.  So  long  as  no  social  science  exists, 
the  historian  cannot  determine  the  relation  which 
events  sustain  to  it.  He  does  not  invent  mathematics 
or  science  or  philosophy;  only  as  they  exist  and  exert 
an  influence  is  it  his  province  to  give  an  account  of 
them.  But  the  sociologist  docs  not  merely  describe 
society  and  seek  the  causes  of  its  phenomena ;  he  wants 
to  construct  a  social  system  such  as  has  as  yet  no  his- 
torical existence.  His  work  is  that  of  a  scientist  or 
philosopher;  from  the  material  furnished  by  the  his- 
torian and  by  observation  he  draws  the  principles  of 
society  and  infers  the  social  laws,  a  process  entirely 
different  from  that  whose  end  is  historical  inquiry. 
The  historian  may  give  an  account  of  the  philosophies 
of  Plato,  Aristotle,  Kant,  and  Hegel ;  but  it  would  be 
as  reasonable  to  expect  him  to  construct  them  as  to 
become  the  founder  of  Sociology.  As  the  science  of 
society  lies  nowhere  in  history,  we  cannot  look  to  the 
historian  to  discover  it  there. 


90       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

That  historic  discipline  which  comes  nearest  cover- 
ing the  same  ground  as  Sociology  is  what  the  Germans 
call  Culturgeschichte,  a  history  of  culture  or  of  civili- 
zation. This  has  been  developed  independently  by 
German  scholars  and  dates  back  farther  than  Sociology. 
It  aims  to  give  a  history  of  social  evolution,  tracing 
the  various  stages  of  culture  through  which  humanity 
passed  until  the  present  degree  of  civilization  was 
attained.  If  by  this  method  historic  laws  of  develop- 
ment are  discovered,  much  that  certain  sociologists 
have  particularly  emphasized  will  be  accomplished. 
Why  cannot  this  "culture-history,"  as  some  have 
claimed,  take  the  place  of  Sociology  ? 

The  reason  given  above,  that  Sociology  is  not  an 
historical  discipline,  furnishes  the  answer.  The  ten- 
dency to  reduce  it  to  that  is,  however,  significant  and 
reveals  a  dominant  characteristic  of  our  times.  A 
large  class  of  persons  may  be  designated  as  mere 
observers  and  empiric  investigators,  in  distinction  from 
rational  inquirers  and  philosophic  thinkers.  Facts  are 
gathered  and  classified,  and  statistics  accumulated  till 
we  know  not  what  to  do  with  them;  this  they  regard 
as  all  that  is  required.  Their  work  is  essential,  but 
only  a  beginning.  Laws  and  principles  and  systems 
are  not  picked  up  from  the  surface  of  facts;  they  are 
intellectual  constructions,  a  philosophy  of  the  facts. 
The  student  must  be  a  thinker  in  order  to  become  a 
sociologist.  Those  who  cannot  distinguish  between  a 
history  of  culture  and  a  system  of  culture,  between 
a  history  and  a  science  of  society,  arc  as  rational  as  the 
empiric  who  takes  a  history  of  human  conduct  for  a 
system  of  ethics.  The  sociologist  is  not  merely  intent 
on  discovering  what  the  social  facts  are ;  he  also  insists 
on  knowing  what  they  imply;  he  listens  to  what  things 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  91 

say,  and  from  this  lie  tries  to  learn  what  they  mean. 
Underlying  the  superficial  trend,  now  so  common,  is 
the  false  supposition  that  the  history  of  an  object  is  its 
exhaustive  interpretation.  Many  do  not  study  philoso- 
phy per  se,  but  its  history,  and  then  imagine  that  they 
understand  philosophy,  a  conceit  which  would  vanish  if 
they  truly  became  philosophers.  An  intelligent  study 
of  the  history  of  science,  of  theology,  of  law,  and  of 
other  disciplines,  implies  a  knowledge  of  these  sub- 
jects. This  is  true  of  disciplines  which  have  a  long 
history;  but  Sociology  is  yet  to  be  constructed,  and 
therefore  can  be  still  less  completely  studied  in  its 
history  than  the  older  disciplines. 

The  difference  between  the  genesis  of  a  subject  and 
its  critical  interpretation  is  important.  Scarcely  any 
discrimination  is  more  essential  than  that  between  his- 
tory and  observation,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  philo- 
sophic effort  which,  on  the  other,  constructs  a  rational 
system.  This  will  become  more  evident  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  Method.  Fortunately,  there  are  evidences 
that  the  day  is  waning  when  sensation  was  taken  for 
thinking,  and  when  men  feared  that  by  an  intellectual 
mastery  of  things  they  were  in  danger  of  losing  the 
grip  of  their  reality.  The  rational  element  in  philoso- 
phy, science,  and  in  any  system  of  thought  adheres 
strictly  to  fact,  but  interprets  the  fact,  relates  it,  goes 
to  its  source  and  results,  and  thus,  by  its  explanation, 
brings  out  the  true  reality  in  place  of  what  only  seems 
to  be  the  reality.  It  is  the  science  of  society  which 
makes  ns  truly  the  possessors  of  society,  intellectually 
its  masters.  What  has  been  said  will  not,  therefore, 
be  taken  as  an  indication  that  we  can  evolve,  specula- 
tively, from  our  brains  systems  without  facts.  History 
receives  its  proper  place,  and  this  cannot  be  the  means 
of  depreciating  its  importance. 


92     lyTRODUCTioy  to  study  of  sociology. 

History  deals  with  society,  giving  an  account  of  social  genesis 
and  social  transformations.  It  is  concerned  about  continuous  fac- 
tors. The  individual  passes  away  ;  but  certain  forces  in  him  may 
affect  society  and  become  a  permanent  factor  in  social  progress. 
Historic  charactei-s  are  such  as  have  thus  helped  to  make  history ; 
that  is,  their  personal  force  has  become  a  social  force.  Human 
history  is  an  account  of  men  so  far  as  associated  and  acting  on  one 
another.  It  is  therefore  evident  how  it  comes  that  history,  which 
treats  of  society,  has  been  thought  to  take  the  place  of  Sociology. 
This  of  com'se  is  only  possible  on  the  part  of  men  who  take  the 
genesis  of  a  thing  for  its  scientific  intei-pretation.  The  same  mis- 
take is  made  by  those  who  describe  a  process  of  evolution  and  then 
imagine  that  they  have  explained  the  nature  of  the  universe. 

For  the  sociologist  history  is  of  inestimable  importance. 

E.  B.  Tylor  ("  Researches  into  the  Early  History  of  Mankind") 
says :  "  The  explanation  of  the  state  of  things  in  which  we  live  has 
often  to  be  sovight  in  the  condition  of  rude  and  early  tribes  ;  and 
without  a  knowledge  of  this  to  guide  us,  we  may  miss  the  meaning 
even  of  familiar  thoughts  and  practices.  ...  It  is  indeed  hardly 
too  much  to  say  that  civilization,  being  a  process  of  long  and 
complex  growth,  can  only  be  thoroughly  understood  when  studied 
through  its  entire  range ;  that  the  past  is  continually  needed  to 
explain  the  present,  and  the  whole  to  explain  the  past." 

On  the  history  of  culture  as  a  totality  or  on  particular  phases  of 
it  numerous  works  have  appeared.  These  include  such  works  as 
Mr.  Spencer  classifies  as  "Descriptive  Sociology."  See  also 
"  Primitive  Culture  :  Researches  into  the  Development  of  INIythol- 
ogy.  Philosophy,  Religion,  Language,  Art,  and  Custom,"  by  E.  B. 
Tylor,  —  first  chapter,  "  The  Science  of  Culture ; "  second,  "  The 
Development  of  Culture  ; "  third  and  fourth,  "  Survival  of  Culture." 
"  A  History  of  the  INIental  Growth  of  INIankind  in  Ancient  Times," 
by  John  S.  Ilittell.  "  Social  History  of  the  Races  of  Mankind,"  by 
Feathernian. 

Ethnology  has  become  a  favorite  theme  wnth  investigators,  and 
numerous  valuable  works  have  appeared  in  the  English,  German, 
French,  and  other  languages. 

A  philosophy  of  history,  if  ever  realized,  cannot  take  the  place  of 
Sociology.  It  aims  at  the  rational  interpretation  of  what  lias 
transpired,  and  thus  furnishes  valuable  material  for  the  science  of 
society,  which  it,  however,  does  not  construct. 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  93 

On  historiography,  "Lehrbuch  der  Historischen  Methode,"  by 
Bernheim,  is  excellent. 

Kidd's  "  Social  Evolution  "  is  so  well  known  as  hardly  \/o  require 
special  mention. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Difference  between  History,  Historiography,  and  Philoso- 
phy of  History.  The  Genetic  and  the  Rational  Interpreta- 
tion of  an  Object.  The  History  of  Society  and  the  Philosophy 
of  Society.  Does  History  invent,  construct,  or  only  record  ? 
Value  of  History  to  the  Sociologist  as  a  Repository  of  Human 
Thought,  Action,  and  Institutions.  Psychology  in  History. 
Meaning  of  Culture  and  Civilization.  Does  Evolution  always 
involve  Progress  ?  History  as  a  mere  Succession  of  Phe- 
nomena and  as  giving  the  Genesis  of  Things.  Evolution  as 
a  Method  of  Procedure  and  as  an  Ontological  Interpretation 
of  the  Universe.  Difference  between  the  Description  of 
Society  and  a  History  of  Society, 


Other  Disciplines. 

In  the  above  we  have  the  principles  according  to 
which  the  relation  of  Sociology  to  other  systems  of 
thought  must  be  decided ;  it  is  consequently  not  neces- 
sary to  give  details  respecting  the  rest  of  the  allied 
subjects.  Some  German  scholars  have  attempted  to 
develop  a  "Psychology  of  Nations,"  concentrating  atten- 
tion on  what  is  called  the  mind  of  a  people,  its  mani- 
festations and  products,  just  as  the  ordinary  psychology 
is  devoted  to  the  interpretation  of  the  individual  mind. 
This  effort  to  get  the  G-eht  or  spirit  of  the  peoples  as 
it  objectifies  itself  in  myths,  arts,  religion,  literature, 
government,  institutions,  is  exceedingly  interesting 
and  of  great  value  to  the  sociologist.  Professors  Lazarus 
and  Steinthal,  the  chief  promoters  of  this  study,  have 
brought  to  light  many  important  social  facts.  By  taking 
the  spirit  found  in  the  different  nations  it  may  be  pos- 


94       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

sible  to  determine  the  dominant  characteristics  of  the 
Zeitgeist.  But  the  psychology  of  nations  does  not 
furnish  the  philosophy  of  society ;  it  must  rather  be 
regarded  as  a  department  of  the  more  general  subject, 
and  a  preparation  for  it,  than  its  substitute.  Not  the 
mind  of  a  people  is  the  subject-matter  of  the  sociologist, 
but  society  or  human  association,  thus  making  a  differ- 
ence in  the  centre  of  attention.^ 

In  a  department  so  extensive  as  Sociology,  and  era- 
bracing  so  many  subjects,  it  is  natural  that  some  social 
phases  should  have  received  especial  attention  and 
development.  There  are  persons  with  a  dominant 
practical  tendency  who  look  on  Sociology  as  concerned 
mainly  with  human  welfare.  For  such  its  essence  is 
found  in  social  ethics,  a  subject  which  has  been  treated 
in  works  on  general  ethics.  We  shall,  however,  see 
that  this  is  but  one  phase  of  Sociology,  its  practical 
culmination,  it  is  true,  but  presupposing  a  knowledge 
of  what  society  is,  in  order  to  learn  what  it  ought  to 
be.  In  social  ethics  we  have  a  practical  application  of 
sociological  theory  to  reform  and  to  human  progress; 
and  so  far  as  it  gives  the  most  general  principles  for 
such  application,  it  is  itself  a  department  of  social 
science. 

Jurisprudence  belongs  properly  to  the  science  of  the 
state.  It  gives  the  legal  aspects  of  society,  and  its 
history  enables  us  to  interpret  many  social  views  and 
forms.  The  law  usually  expresses  in  a  condensed  and 
authoritative  form   the  social  theories  dominant  at  a 

1  Mauy  of  the  discussions  in  the  journal  published  by  tlie  professors 
are  valuable  for  the  consideration  of  society  at  large.  The  need  of  a 
discipline  larger  than  that  which  considers  only  a  state  or  nation  was  rec- 
ognized by  Professor  Lazarus ;  but  he  regarded  tiie  national  life  as 
particularly  important  and  therefore  worthy  of  special  treatment.  ("  Zeit- 
Bciirift  fur  Volkerpsychologie  und  Spraclnvissenschaft,"  iii.  420,  note.) 


THE  RELATION   OF  SOCIOLOGY.  95 

particular  time,  or  at  least  those  of  the  ruling  classes 
which  control  the  legal  enactments.  Yet  the  law 
expresses  but  one  aspect  of  society,  namely,  the  legis- 
lation required  for  social  well-being.  So  closely  is  the 
subject  related  to  political  ethics,  that  it  may  be  classi- 
fied under  that  head. 

Among  the  humanistic  studies  which  are  important 
both  as  social  products  and  social  forces,  we  place 
linguistics.  Language  is  a  deposit  of  the  history  of 
the  race,  being  of  humanity  a  record  similar  to  that  of 
nature  as  written  in  its  rocks.  Peoples  put  themselves 
into  their  language,  body  themselves  forth  in  it,  and, 
though  dead,  speak  through  it.  The  language  into 
which  a  man  is  born  is  one  of  his  greatest  inheritances 
from  the  generations  of  the  past.  We  call  it  his 
"mother  tongue,"  but  it  is  more  than  that;  it  is  the 
mother  of  a  man's  intellect  and  of  the  products  of  that 
intellect.  Another  form  of  expression  is  art,  and 
some  peoples  of  the  past  are  known  to  us  only  through 
the  relics  of  their  art  which  have  descended  to  us. 
Literature  we  might  include  in  language,  and  philoso- 
phy also,  as  the  highest  expression  of  the  wisdom  of 
the  ages.  In  all  these  we  behold  social  and  not  mere 
individual  productions.  Psychology  as  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  individual  mind,  psycho-physics  and  anthro- 
pology, treating  of  mind  and  body  in  their  relation  and 
interaction,  furnish  indispensable  material  for  our 
study ;  but  they  are  not  in  danger  of  being  confounded 
with  Sociology. 

This  brief  survey  suffices  to  show  how  intimately  all 
human  disciplines  are  related  to  our  subject.  Anatomy, 
physiology,  biology,  and  all  the  natural  sciences,  as  we 
have  seen,  also  have  significance  for  it,  since  it  must 
take  into  account  a  man's  body  and  his  natural  environ- 


96       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

raent.      But  in  the  study  of  humanity  we  lay  especial 
stress  on  the  distinctively  human  disciplines. 

The  psychology  of  nations,  like  the  history  of  culture,  is  evi- 
dence that  society,  instead  of  the  individual,  is  becoming  the  focus 
of  thought.  In  language,  in  ethics,  in  laws,  in  all  institutions,  we 
are  learning  to  discover  and  emphasize  the  social  factors.  We  are 
born  into  social  conditions  by  means  of  which  we  become  the  heirs 
of  all  i3ast  ages  ;  and  our  inheritance  from  society  imposes  on  us  a 
debt  of  which  we  can  repay  to  society  hardly  an  appreciable  frac- 
tion. Through  any  social  deposit  of  the  ages  we  can  approach  the 
subject  of  Sociology  and  discover  its  essentials.  Montesquieu  in 
discussing  the  Spirit  of  Laws  continually  touches  fundamental 
principles  of  Sociology.  In  harmony  with  the  general  trend,  ethics 
is  passing  rapidly  from  the  individual  to  the  social  stage.  Instead 
of  the  individualistic  ethics  of  the  past,  the  time  may  not  be  dis- 
tant when  social  ethics  will  be  the  chief  subject  and  individual 
ethics  merely  a  subdivision.  A  true  sociological  ethics  will,  how- 
ever, enhance  the  importance  of  the  ethics  of  individuals. 

Not  only  is  there  a  tendency  to  make  disciplines  social  which 
were  heretofore  treated  as  individualistic  (psychology,  ethics),  but 
even  so  far  as  they  remain  individualistic  more  emphasis  is  placed 
on  social  influence.  Thus  in  the  psychology,  ethics,  and  education 
of  the  individual  mind  more  attention  is  given  to  the  influence  of 
the  social  environment.  There  is  marked  growth  in  the  conception 
of  organic  connection  in  thought,  relating  more  intimately  the 
various  disciplines  and  systems,  and  also  between  persons,  so  relat- 
ing them  as  to  overcome  their  isolation  and  form  society. 

Each  particular  social  discipline  takes  a  social  force  and  reduces 
its  working  to  a  system.  Thus  the  political  and  economic  forces 
give  us  politics  and  economics ;  so  we  have  associations  which  are 
the  products  of  recreative,  ethical,  religious,  and  other  forces.  Each 
social  discipline  deals  with  some  particular  dominant  social  force, 
treating  as  subordinate  any  other  forces  connected  with  this  domi- 
nant one.  But  Sociology  takes  society  as  a  totality,  making  all  the 
social  forces  its  suljject-matter,  considering  their  interaction,  their 
development,  and  their  products. 

REFLECTIONS. 

What  do  we  mean  by  the  Spirit  of  a  People  ?  "What  a 
Psychology  of  Nations  involves.      What  Factors  determine 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  97 

the  National  Spirit  ?  Characteristics  of  different  Nations. 
Psychology  of  different  Organizations  and  Stages  of  Culture. 
Ethics,  Jurisprudence,  Language,  Literature,  Institutions,  how 
far  Individual,  how  far  Social,  Products. 


Is  Sociology  a  Grouping  op  other  Disciplines,  or  a 
New  Discipline  ? 

Could  we  not  by  merely  grouping  the  various  human 
disciplines  which  have  been  developed  construct  Soci- 
ology ?  If  those  that  exist  meet  all  requirements,  why 
not  rather  develop  them  than  spend  our  effort  in  add- 
ing a  new  one  ?  By  grouping  the  various  disciplines 
which  pertain  to  humanity,  we  at  best  get  only  separate 
sciences  of  certain  human  factors,  as  economics  and 
politics ;  but  this  leaves  society  itself  without  a  science. 
No  one  of  these  makes  the  interpretation  of  human 
association  as  such  its  aim.  Each  discipline  attends 
to  its  own  special  department;  but  it  is  not  the  busi- 
ness of  any  to  show  how  all  are  related  to  one  another 
and  constitute  a  totality.  We  do  not  get  a  complete 
idea  of  the  human  body  by  merely  describing  each 
member  separately;  it  must  also  be  shown  how  the 
members  are  organically  connected,  form  a  totality, 
and  act  as  a  unit.  However  much  the  separate  social 
disciplines  may  help  us  to  construct  a  social  science, 
they  cannot  do  it  themselves.  Biology,  anthropology, 
psychology,  linguistics,  history,  political  economy,  the 
science  of  politics,  give  data  indispensable  for  Soci- 
ology; but  not  one  of  them  has  society  itself  as  its 
subject-matter,  neither  do  all  together  make  the  inter- 
})retation  of  society  per  se  their  aim. 

Sociology  is  needed  to  make  society  the  one  object 
of  inquiry.      Sociology  is  that  comprehensive  general 


98       INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

science  to  which  the  other  human  disciplines  are  tribu- 
tary, in  which  they  cuhninate  and  find  their  comple- 
tion. In  nature  no  special  science,  as  chemistry,  or 
geology,  can  claim  to  be  an  interpretation  of  the  mate- 
rial universe ;  but  from  all  the  natural  sciences  certain 
inferences  can  be  drawn  which  are  general  in  character 
and  have  an  application  to  the  universe  as  a  totality. 
This  is  the  work  of  philosophy,  whose  business  it  is 
to  search  for  the  ultimate  principles.  Philosophy  is 
the  apex  of  the  intellectual  pyramid ;  all  objects  belong 
to  its  basis,  and  it  is  itself  the  highest  possible  ascent 
of  rational  thouglit.  Sociology  is  a  construction  of 
scientific  and  philosophic  thinking  on  the  basis  of  all 
other  human  disciplines.  It  rises  above  the  rest.  The 
special  social  disciplines  culminate  in  it;  and  in  Soci- 
ology their  relation  to  one  another  becomes  manifest. 
All  their  rays  are  concentrated  in  a  focus,  yet  have  a 
definite  relation  of  position  and  intensity.  If  one  ray 
claims  to  be  the  focus,  it  ignores  the  others  and  its 
own  relation  to  them.  This  is  the  very  thing  which 
has  happened  with  respect  to  the  human  disciplines. 
Thus,  as  stated  above,  in  Greece  politics  took  the  place 
of  Sociology;  the  individual  and  society  were  essen- 
tially absorbed  by  the  state.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the 
church  and  its  theology  were  the  culmination  of  human 
thought  and  association,  and  they  determined  the  point 
of  view  from  which  all  objects  were  observed.  In  more 
recent  times  economic  science  has  not  only  been  called 
the  social  science,  but  it  has  actually  striven  to  com- 
prehend society,  as  if  it  could  interpret  all  social 
phenomena  and  meet  all  social  demands.  Recent  his- 
tory has  had  its  ei-a  of  individualism,  which  depreciated 
society  and  made  the  individual  the  focus  of  attention. 
Now   we   have  a  conflict   between    individualism    and 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  99 

socialism,  because  the  proper  sphere  of  each  is  not 
recognized.  Opposed  to  government  as  despotism,  or 
as  an  abstraction  hovering  over  nations,  we  have  anar- 
chism. Human  thought  and  life  have  suffered  enough 
from  these  one-sided  attempts  to  interpret  humanity 
and  determine  its  course.  It  is  equal  to  the  attempt 
to  make  chemistry  the  interpreter  of  the  universe. 
Politics,  theology,  economics,  are  all  important;  but 
neither  can  absorb  the  rest  without  injury  to  itself  and 
them.  They  and  much  besides  belong  to  society,  and  in 
the  science  of  society  each  finds  its  proper  place  and 
its  right  relation  to  the  other  special  human  sciences. 
We  need  the  general,  culminating,  all-comprehending 
science,  Sociology,  in  order  that  we  may  overcome  the 
pernicious  error  of  making  now  one  special  science, 
and  then  another,  the  totality,  which  it  is  not,  and  the 
interpreter  of  the  whole,  which  it  cannot  be.  Not 
from  the  first,  the  second,  or  the  tenth  step  of  the 
pyramid  can  the  whole  structure  itself  and  the  sur- 
rounding country  be  seen,  but  only  from  the  apex. 
The  service  rendered  by  the  special  sciences  to  Sociology 
is  great ;  but  its  service  to  them  is  not  less.  The  arm 
is  of  great  use  to  the  body ;  but  of  what  use  is  the  arm 
without  the  body  ?  We  want  to  grasp  the  meaning  of 
society  in  order  to  determine  the  relation  of  the  organs 
to  the  total  social  organism  and  to  one  another. 

The  nature  of  Sociology  is  misunderstood  by  the  writer  who 
claims  that  "  it  depends  more  or  less  upon  all  other  sciences,  but  it 
cannot  be  shown  that  any  other  science  is  in  the  least  dependent 
upon  it."  Bernheim  regards  Sociology  as  an  aid  to  history, 
Hul/xwissenxcJiaft  der  Geschiclite ;  but  it  is  much  more. 

The  social  sciences  can  of  course  exist  without  Sociology ;  they 
were  in  process  of  development  before  it  was  constructed ;  but  for 
their  perfection  Sociology  is  necessary.  They  culminate  in  it,  and 
by  means  of  it  receive  their  proper  place  in  the  social  organism. 


100     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

When  political  science  or  political  economy  seeks  to  become  the 
social  science,  Sociology  interferes  and  puts  it  where  it  belongs  in 
the  system  of  humanity.  Not  only  is  the  tendency  of  the  mind  to 
unity  thus  satisfied,  but  the  one-sidedness  resulting  from  the  ab- 
stract, isolated  development  of  a  subject  is  overcome.  The  various 
disciplines  are  likewise  made  more  fruitful  by  being  put  into 
organic  relation  with  one  another.  Political  economy  becomes  a 
new  discipline  when  related  to  all  the  higher  interests  of  society ; 
and  there  is  a  renewal  of  political  science  when  it  passes  from  the 
abstract  to  the  social  stage,  defining  its  relation  to  other  social  dis- 
ciplines, and  making  the  social  actuality  the  basis  of  political 
activity.  When  the  science  of  the  state  takes  its  place  in  Sociology, 
finds  itself  an  organ  in  the  organism,  patriotism  will  cease  to  be  a 
synonyme  of  national  selfishness  and  injustice. 

Not  by  adding  or  grouping  the  various  social  sciences  do  we  get 
Sociology.  The  family  -\-  economic  and  other  voluntary  organiza- 
tions -\-  institutions  -\-  the  church  -\-  the  state  do  not  constitute 
social  science.  They  are  manifestations  and  forms  of  society,  and 
it  is  the  society  revealed  through  them  which  we  want  to  appre- 
hend. Not  as  isolated  do  we  seek  to  understand  these  various 
social  forms,  but  as  connected,  as  forming  an  organic  whole.  The 
science  of  society  considers  each  social  science  and  each  social 
gi'oup  from  the  standpoint  of  the  totality.  It  does  not  lose  the 
individual  in  society,  but  it  views  him  in  humanity  as  we  view  a 
drop  in  the  sea ;  it  views  societies  in  their  distinctness,  yet  as  but 
so  many  currents  in  the  same  ocean.  We  can  consider  a  drop  as 
the  essential  thing  (individualism)  ;  or  we  can  trace  one  current 
after  another  (the  special  social  sciences)  ;  or  we  can  consider  the 
drops  and  the  currents  as  they  form  the  ocean  (the  view  of  Sociol- 
ogy). Take  the  drop  from  the  sea,  still  it  is  of  the  sea  and  retains 
its  flavor ;  so  if  an  individual  is  the  last  of  his  family  and  outside 
of  the  limits  of  church  and  state  and  all  organization,  still  he  is  a 
product  of  society  and  a  member  of  society.  This  view  of  the  indi- 
vidual as  related  to  the  whole  of  humanity,  and  of  each  particular 
society  as  related  to  aU  other  societies  and  as  a  manifestation  of 
society  per  se,  is  given  by  no  special  social  science,  and  by  no  other 
discipline  than  Sociology.  The  student  can  therefore  study  .societies 
and  yet  miss  the  idea  of  society  ;  he  can  study  social  sciences  and 
have  no  conception  of  the  social  science.  Sociology,  as  the  social  sys- 
tem, treats  individuals,  societies,  social  phenomena  and  institutions, 


THE  RELATION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  101 

never  for  their  owu  sake,  however  important  that  may  be  in  itself, 
but  solely  for  the  sake  of  determining  their  organic  connection  as 
constituent  parts  of  the  social  system. 

If  I  ask  a  man  what  language  is,  and  he  begins  to  teach  me 
French,  I  object  and  say  that  I  want  to  know  what  language  itself 
is,  not  a  particular  language.  Then  he  takes  up  the  ancient  lan- 
guages, and  English,  German,  Russian,  and  others  ;  still  1  object 
and  demand  what  language  is,  not  what  the  ancient  and  modern 
languages  are.  Language  is  in  all  the  languages,  yet  no  language 
is  language  per  se.  Language  itself  is  the  means  of  communicating 
ideas  by  sound  or  writing ;  each  language  communicates  ideas  in 
a  particular  way,  but  it  is  only  one  of  many  ways.  At  first  it  may 
seem  as  if  the  answer  to  the  question,  What  is  language  ?  must  be 
so  empty  as  to  be  almost  meaningless  ;  yet  the  answer  involves 
that  rich  and  important  field  designated  by  linguistics  or  philology. 

Sociology,  the  science  of  society,  is  similar  to  linguistics,  the 
science  of  language.  Every  language  involves  the  science  of  lan- 
guage, but  also  many  concrete  elemeiits  which  cannot  be  considered 
in  linguistics  ;  so  every  social  science  involves  the  science  of  society, 
but  also  many  concrete  facts  which  Sociology  must  leave  to  the 
special  social  sciences. 

REFLECTIONS. 

DiflFerence  betTveen  the  Collection  and  Classification  of 
Facts,  and  Science.  Between  the  Grouping  of  the  Social 
Sciences  (encyclopaedia)  and  Sociology.  "What  the  Social 
Sciences  do  for  Sociology,  and  ■what  Sociology  does  for  the 
Social  Sciences.  Different  Point  of  View  of  Sociology  and 
of  the  Social  Sciences  Can  any  Special  Social  Discipline 
take  the  Place  of  Sociology  ?  Can  all  the  Social  Disciplines  ? 
Illustration  from  Philology.      Review  of  the  whole  Chapter. 


102     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

DIVISION    OF    SOCIOLOGY. 

The  Problem.  Sociology,  the  science  of  society,  is  iioio 
distinctly  before  us.  So  vast,  however,  is  its  material  that 
for  ijrofitahle  study  classification  is  necessary.  The  clas- 
sificatio7h  must  he  on  the  principle  that  things  which  are 
alike  are  to  he  united  and  that  they  are  to  he  separated 
from  things  which  are  different. 

Sociology  is  one.,  hut  a  unity  in  diversity.  We  ayialyze 
it  according  to  its  diversity ;  hut  this  analysis  is  for  the 
sake  of  hetter  interpreting  the  totality.  Tlic  analysis  in 
anatomy  and  physiology  is  for  the  study  of  the  various 
parts  as  forming  the  undivided  body.  Social  synthesis  is 
always  the  ultimate  aim  of  social  analysis. 

Numerous  divisions  of  Sociology  arc  iwssihle,  and  each 
may  have  cogerit  reasons.  The  best  is  that  which  most 
naturally  groups  the  diverse  materials  and  presents  the 
greatest  advantages  for  systematic  study.  Each  division 
is  in  itself  a  system,  and  the  synthesis  of  the  divisions  con- 
stitutes the  larger  system.,  the  science  of  society. 

Society  is  to  he  interpreted.  The  problem  now  is  how  so 
to  classify  the  objects  of  investigation  as  to  make  the  inter- 
pretation most  perfect. 

Sociology  is  unity,  yet  multiplicity  ;  it  can  be  rightly 
apprehended  only  as  one  in  many,  and  as  many  in  one. 
Thus  nature  is  a  unit ;  yet  for  the  purpose  of  the  most 
thorough  study  we  form  various  natural  sciences,  each 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  103 

distinct,  but  all  united.  So  in  the  same  landscape  we 
distinguish  between  mountain,  valley,  and  stream. 

A  nugget  of  gold  may  be  divided,  yet  each  division 
will  be  gold  and  as  such  complete  iu  itself.  It  will  be  a 
specimen  by  which  gold  everywhere  may  be  judged.  It 
may  be  added  to  other  gold;  but  this  quantitative  in- 
crease adds  nothing  to  its  quality. 

In  sociological  study  we  find  both  qualitative  and 
quantitative  differences.  A  fact  may  be  repeated  a 
million  times,  yet  it  need  be  mastered  but  once  in  order 
to  understand  all  its  repetitions.  Thus  a  fact  in  nature 
is  a  type  in  which  all  like  facts  can  be  studied.  The 
case  is  different,  however,  when  quality  is  considered. 
A  knowledge  of  gold  does  not  teach  me  what  silver  is. 
Each  quality  must  be  studied  by  itself. 

Quantitative  differences  play  a  prominent  part  in 
Sociology,  as  in  the  division  of  labor,  in  numbers  which 
constitute  an  army,  and  in  the  amount  of  wealth.  The 
division  of  our  subject,  however,  depends  on  qualitative 
differences. 

Mentally  we  may  separate  into  different  parts  an 
object  which  in  itself  cannot  be  divided.  In  the  study 
of  man  we  can  consider  the  body  by  itself  and  the  mind 
by  itself ;  but  in  the  real  man  we  cannot  take  the  body 
from  the  mind  or  the  mind  from  the  body.  The 
body  can  be  dissected  only  after  the  life  has  been  de- 
stroyed. 

Evidently,  then,  divisions  in  the  case  of  organic  sub- 
jects are  mental  abstractions ;  parts  organically  united 
are  mentally  separated.  The  mind  is  considered  apart 
from  the  body  in  order  that  it  may  be  the  more  thor- 
oughly studied  according  to  its  inherent  nature.  By 
thus  isolating  a  subject  for  the  more  perfect  concentra- 
tion of  attention  it  is  sure  of  the  fullest  development. 


104     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

We  know  tliat  the  chemical  elements  are  scattered 
throughout  the  universe  and  enter  into  various  combina- 
tions ;  yet  we  try  to  take  each  element  by  itself,  to  learn 
what  it  is  and  what  can  be  done  with  it.  So  in  psy- 
chology we  isolate  intellect,  susceptibility,  and  will,  and 
discuss  each  separately ;  but  the  real  mind  cannot  be 
separated  into  three  unconnected  chambers,  and  in  the 
actual  mental  processes  we  can  never  claim  to  have  any 
faculty  in  absolute  isolation. 

Important  as  such  isolation  is  for  clearness  and  thor- 
oughness, it  may  likewise  be  misleading.  Mental  divi- 
sions are  sometimes  taken  for  actual  separation.  The 
psychological  isolation  of  the  intellect  and  exclusive 
emphasis  on  it  liave  made  the  impression  that  psy- 
chology treats  of  mind  merely  as  intellect.  One  of  the 
greatest  perversions  of  modern  times  results  from  the 
isolation  of  the  economic  force,  as  is  the  case  in  political 
economy.  Tliis  has  actually  resulted  in  treating  eco- 
nomic laws  as  if  thoy  acted  independently  of  ethical, 
religious,  and  social  considerations.  We  have  also  seen 
how  a  false  abstraction  has  led  to  a  process  in  politics 
and  economics  whicli  tended  to  make  a  social  science 
the  social  science.  The  partial  truth  found  by  means  of 
isolation  must  not  be  mistaken  for  the  whole  truth, 
which  can  be  discovered  only  by  studying  an  organ  as 
j)art  of  the  organism  which  it  lielps  to  form. 

These  considerations  are  essential  in  connection  with 
the  division  of  Sociology.  The  science  of  society  deals 
with  life  in  its  most  complex  forms;  all  the  social 
forces  arc  organically  related,  they  interact,  and  con- 
stitute a  totality ;  and  while  we  are  obliged  to  isolate 
these  forces  for  intellectual  reasons,  we  must  not  for- 
get that  in  society  itself  the  social  forces  arc  indisso- 
lubly  united. 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  105 

Not  for  the  sake  of  society,  then,  but  for  the  sake 
of  our  conception  of  society  are  divisions  made  in  Sociol- 
ogy. From  the  total  unity  we  abstract  a  part,  in  order 
to  concentrate  our  attention  on  it  and  fathom  its  mean- 
ing. Division  is  thus  a  form  of  mental  specialization, 
just  as  from  the  human  body  we  take  a  hand  and  make 
it  an  object  of  special  investigation.  Our  inability  to 
follow  more  than  one  process  of  thought  at  a  time  makes 
divisions  a  mental  convenience  and  even  necessity. 

The  division  is  an  analysis  of  the  subject.  This  anal- 
ysis is  not  arbitrary ;  it  will  help  us  to  understand  a 
subject  only  in  case  there  is  some  basis  for  it  in  the 
subject  itself.  The  aim  of  the  analysis  is  to  bring  out 
actual  differences ;  it  must  present  to  the  mind  ideas 
which  can  be  abstracted  from  the  rest,  and  which  offer 
special  advantages  to  the  mind  by  means  of  this  separa- 
tion. There  is  thus  a  reason  for  the  division  in  the 
nature  of  things.  The  division  ought  also  to  be  logical, 
no  two  divisions  overlapping  each  other  or  covering 
the  same  ground,  yet  all  together  including  the  whole 
subject. 

The  division,  like  the  definition,  can  deal  only  with 
the  most  general  characteristics  ;  it  draws  lines,  but 
does  not  give  all  the  contents  between  the  lines.  It  is 
evident  that  a  subject  cannot  be  divided  unless  there  is 
some  knowledge  of  its  contents ;  one  must  know  what 
is  involved  in  mathematics  before  he  can  divide  it  into 
its  different  departments.  The  same  is  true  of  Sociol- 
ogy ;  a  general  idea  of  its  contents  is  the  condition 
for  a  division  of  those  contents.  This,  however,  does 
not  imply  that  all  the  details  of  a  subject  must  be  mas- 
tered in  order  that  the  division  may  be  made.  Since 
it  is  so  general  in  character,  the  student  can  make  it 
who  has  a  general  survey  of   the  contents ;   indeed,  it 


106     INTRODUCriON  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

is  possible  that  the  very  defiuitiou  may  involve  the 
division. 

Some  may  be  deterred  from  an  effort  at  division 
because  the  subject  is  so  vast  and  complicated,*  and 
embraces  so  large  a  variety  of  objects.  But  whatever 
the  multiplicity  involved,  some  classification,  and  there- 
fore division,  must  be  possible.  The  student  cannot 
expect  the  best  results  by  wandering  hither  and  thither 
in  Sociology,  picking  up  what  fragments  he  can,  without 
systematic  classification,  or  with  a  classification  too  par- 
tial to  contain  the  whole  subject.  The  vastness  of  the 
subject  makes  division  the  more  necessary,  so  that  the 
separate  parts  may  be  distinctly  apprehended. 

The  division  of  Sociology  into  Statics  and  Dynamics 
has  been  common  since  Comte's  day.  The  explanation 
of  social  phenomena  by  physical  terms  has  not  proved 
satisfactory.  Bodies  may  be  at  rest  in  relation  to  the 
objects  around  them ;  but  only  by  means  of  violent 
abstraction  can  we  imagine  society  at  rest  or  in  a  state 
of  equilibrium  through  the  forces  affecting  it.  Dynam- 
ics, as  the  science  of  matter  in  motion,  when  applied 
to  Sociology  is  used  for  the  movement  or  evolution 
of  society.  If  with  Comte  we  use  Static  Sociology  for 
society  in  a  state  of  order,  and  Dynamic  Sociology  for 
society  in  a  state  of  progress,  we  are  apt  to  get  a  false 
notion  of  society,  a  notion  which  Comte  himself,  how- 
ever, rejects.  By  distinguishing  between  society  in  a 
state  of  order  and  in  i)rogi-ess  it  looks  as  if  the  two 
were  irreconcilable.  Does  order  mean  stability  as  dis- 
tinct from  progress?  May  not  progress  or  progressive 
movement  be  the  highest  order  ?  Nor  are  we  better 
reconciled  to  this  division  when  we  examine  Mr.  Spen- 
cer's book  on  "  Social  Statics,"  whose  complete  title  is, 
"  Social  Statics,  or  the  Conditions  essential  to  Human 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  107 

Happiness  specified,  and  the  First  of  them  developed." 
Is,  then,  social  movement  not  a  condition  of  human 
happiness  ?  Even  if  the  division  were  adopted,  another 
would  have  to  be  added  to  make  it  complete.  In 
mechanics  we  have  matter  at  rest  or  in  motion,  and 
an  explanation  of  matter  is  necessary ;  so  society  must 
be  explained  before  its  order  or  progress  can  be  intelli- 
gently considered.  On  account  of  its  great  complexity 
and  difficulty  this  is  far  more  necessary  in  the  case  of 
human  society  than  in  the  case  of  matter.  Some  vio- 
lence will  be  required  to  make  the  discussion  of  society 
at  rest  an  interpretation  of  the  nature  of  society, 
whether  at  rest  or  in  motion,  and  this  interpretation  is 
what  is  now  most  needed  in  Sociology.  Therefore  we 
reject  the  division  of  Sociology  into  Statics  and  Dynam- 
ics, just  as  we  reject  Comte's  view  of  Sociology  as  Social 
Physics.  Aside  from  the  theoretical  reasons,  the  stu- 
dent will  find  the  inadequacy  of  the  division  confirmed 
by  the  works  which  have  adopted  it. 

As  a  preliminary  to  the  above  division  Mr.  Spencer 
has  "  Descriptive  Sociology,"  whose  purpose  it  is  "  to 
furnish  materials  for  a  Comparative  Sociology,  and  for 
the  subsequent  determination  of  the  ultimate  laws  to 
which  social  phenomena  conform." 

This  affords  fresh  proof  that  a  thorough,  critical  revi- 
sion of  the  subject  is  required.  Descriptive  Sociology 
involves  an  absurdity.  The  term  implies  a  description 
of  Sociology,  but  what  is  meant  and  actually  given  is  a 
description  of  society.  How  can  there  be  a  descriptive 
Sociology  before  Sociology  itself  is  constructed  ?  What 
Sociology  is  there  to  be  described  ?  If  Sociology  is  the 
science  of  society,  the  general  definition,  then  descriptive 
Sociology  is  a  descriptive  science  of  society.  But  it  can- 
not be  that,  for  its  mission  is  simply  "  to  furnish  ma- 


108     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

terials  "  for  the  construction  of  Sociology.  As  well  call 
natural  history  a  descriptive  science  of  nature.  Mr. 
Spencer,  by  making  the  collection  of  materials  in  order 
to  form  the  science  a  description  of  the  science  itself, 
has  increased  the  confusion  in  Sociology.  Just  as  we 
distinguish  between  society  and  its  science,  so  we  dis- 
tinguish between  social  and  sociological ;  but  this  dis- 
tinction is  wiped  out  by  making  social  description  a 
description  of  sociological  science. 

So  essential  is  the  division  for  the  clear  apprehension 
and  successful  development  of  the  subject  that  on  it  the 
progress  of  the  student  will  largely  depend.  The  old 
one  must  be  rejected ;  but  how  get  the  new  division  re- 
quired ?  Let  the  mind  be  fixed  intently  on  the  subject 
that  is  to  be  divided.  This  is  the  science  of  society  or 
such  a  knowledge  of  society  as  can  properly  be  desig- 
nated a  science.  The  supreme  question  to  be  answered 
is  :  What  is  society  ?  Not  what  societies  are  is  the  ques- 
tion, but  what  society  per  se  is.  How  can  we  speak  in- 
telligently of  society  in  different  localities  and  times 
unless  we  know  what  we  mean  by  society  ?  We  want 
to  avoid  that  confusion  which  is  inevitable  if  the  student 
is  tlirown  into  the  midst  of  social  descriptions  and  dis- 
cussions, while  all  the  time  it  is  not  clear  what  is  meant 
by  social. 

Society  per  se  must  therefore  be  our  first  aim.  We 
must  find  it  before  we  attempt  to  discuss  it.  Society 
itself  or  the  idea  of  society  must  be  distinguished  from 
the  peculiar  manifestations  of  society  in  a  particular 
time  or  place.  Our  subject  thus  deals  exclusively  with 
society  and  its  manifestations.  The  manifestations  of  so- 
ciety can  be  viewed  in  two  aspects  :  we  can  inquire 
what  society  is  here  and  there,  now  and  then,  and  thus 
get  an  actual  history  of  society ;  or  we  can  ask :   What 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  109 

ought  society  to  be  ?  How  far  does  the  actuality  corres- 
pond with  the  ideal?  We  thus  have  three  divisions: 
what  society  is ;  what  society  becomes  in  the  process  of 
historical  development ;  and  what  society  ought  to  be. 
The  same  can  be  stated  in  this  way :  The  Principles  of 
Society ;  The  Application  of  these  Principles  in  the  Pro- 
cess of  Historical  Development ;  and  The  Application  of 
these  Principles  to  the  Future  Progress  of  Society.  This 
gives  the  principles  and  their  application  as  the  basis  of 
the  division.  If  the  principles  are  complete  and  tlieir 
application  is  correct,  then  all  that  pertains  to  society  is 
included. 

Sociology  is  therefore  divided  as  follows:  I.  The 
Principles  of  Society.  II.  The  Historical  Evolution  of 
these  Principles.  III.  Sociological  Ethics,  or  the  Con- 
ditions of  Social  Progress. 

Other  divisions  are  possible ;  and  if  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  subject  a  better  one  is  proposed,  every 
student  will  welcome  it.  But  the  above  is  the  result  of 
a  natural  analysis  of  the  subject-matter,  and  gives  a 
complete  and  clear  conception  of  all  involved  in  the  vast 
subject  of  Sociology. 

Our  division  is  an  analysis  of  the  definition  and  gives  three  new 
definitions,  each  at  the  head  of  a  distinct  department.  What  society 
is  (its  Idea),  what  it  becomes  (its  History),  what  it  ought  to  be 
(Ethics),  exhaust  the  discussion  of  society  and  give  sharp  outlines 
with  definite  contents. 

This  division  has  been  made  in  spite  of  the  conviction  that  it 
will  meet  with  determined  oj^position.  It  is  not  based  on  any 
dogmatic  decision  as  to  what  Sociology  ought  to  be,  but  on  the 
query :  How  can  we  obtain  the  most  thorough  knowledge  of  society 
for  the  construction  of  the  most  perfect  social  system  ?  If  any  one 
of  the  divisions  is  omitted,  the  knowledge  of  society  will  be  frag- 
mentary. 

Those  who  are  afraid  of  ideas  will  object  especially  to  the  first 
division.     They  want  the  phenomena  of  society;  but  society  itself 


110     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

or  society  per  se  seems  to  them  vague,  incomprehensible,  if  not  fic- 
titious. Their  objections  will  lose  their  validity  so  soon  as  the 
division  itself  is  clearly  apprehended. 

In  the  following  pages  reference  will  frequently  be  made  to 
society,  the  generic  term,  as  distinguished  from  societies,  and  it  is 
important  for  the  student  to  fix  in  his  mind  the  exact  meaning  of 
the  term.  When  in  "  Principles  of  Sociology  "  (I.  435)  JMi'.  Spencer 
heads  a  chapter,  "What  is  a  Society?  "  the  form  is  concrete,  but 
the  meaning  is  abstract.  By  "  a  society  "  he  does  not  mean  a  par- 
ticular society,  but  any  society,  those  qualities  which  must  exist  in 
order  to  constitute  a  society.  He  therefore  means  by  "  a  society  " 
society  in  the  abstract,  what  pertains  to  all  societies ;  this  is  the 
very  sense  in  which  we  use  society  without  further  qualification,  or 
society  itself,  or  society  per  se.  To  define  a  tree  is  to  indicate  what 
we  mean  by  tree  ;  to  define  an  animal  gives  what  is  common  to  all 
animals ;  to  define  a  human  being  is  to  give  a  definition  of  every 
human  being. 

It  may  seem  more  scientific  to  emphasize  the  facts  of  society  as 
the  aim  of  Sociology,  rather  than  society  itself.^  But  it  only  seems 
so.  Those  who  think  that  in  facts  they  have  something  tangible 
and  objective,  while  the  idea  of  society  is  subjective,  are  mistaken. 
The  facts  they  consider  are  mental  possessions  as  much  as  the  idea 
of  society.  They  cannot  step  out  of  their  minds  into  objective 
facts ;  but  the  facts  are  phenomena  of  then'  own  minds,  whatever 
their  source  may  be. 

The  first  division  is  fundamental,  and  therefore  indispensable. 
What  sense  is  there  in  speaking  of  the  phenomena  of  society,  if  it 
cannot  be  determined  what  society  is?  If  the  idea  of  society 
cannot  be  grasped,  how  can  any  fact  be  pronounced  a  phenomenon 
of  society  ?  If  we  cannot  fix  the  meaning  of  society,  is  not  the 
science  of  society  a  misnomer  ?  The  terms  "  society  "  and  "  social " 
constantly  occur  in  Sociology,  and  one  of  the  main  difficulties 

1  G.  Ratzenhofer  begins  his  work  on  "  Wesen  und  Zwccl<  der  I'olitik"  with 
tliis  statement:  "Sociology  deals  with  facts;  its  sphere  is  tlie  development  of 
the  social  life  of  man  in  so  far  as  known  tliroiigh  tradition  and  investigation.  In 
these  facts  it  seeks  the  social  laws,  and  only  in  so  far  allows  speculative  views  as 
they  are  the  rational  inferences  from  the  facts  and  the  laws." 

In  "Social  Theory,  a  Grouping  of  Social  Facts  and  Principles,"  by  John 
IJascom  (p.  8)  this  definition  is  given  :  "  Sociology  is  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  of 
society,  the  order  in  which  they  follow  one  another,  and  their  causes  and 
reasons." 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  Ill 

heretofore  has  been  that  they  did  not  stand  for  clearly  defined 
objects  ;  and  as  they  themselves  were  obscure,  the  entire  subject, 
whose  essence  they  express,  was  likewise  obscure.  By  placing  first 
what  logically  comes  first  we  aim  at  an  explanation  which  shall 
illumine  the  whole  subject. 

The  objection  to  the  first  division  might  be  valid  if  the  idea  of 
society  were  based  on  speculation  or  metaphysics.  But  it  is  noth- 
ing of  the  kind.  We  get  that  idea  from  society  itself ;  the  idea  is 
the  result  of,  or  inference  from,  empirical  investigation.  We  behold 
society  in  what  are  called  social  phenomena,  and  we  simply  attempt 
to  describe  what  we  behold.  In  thus  seeking  for  such  an  idea  as 
will  make'society  definite,  so  that  we  can  intelligently  use  the  term, 
we  do  not  imagine  that  we  have  a  metaphysical  substance  or  any- 
thing else  that  can  be  called  ontological.  Our  intellectual  concep- 
tion of  society  has  therefore  nothing  to  do  with  a  metaphysical 
entity. 

This  primary  emphasis  might  not  be  necessary  if  Sociology  were 
an  old  discipline  in  which  the  sense  of  society  and  social  is  uni- 
versally known.  But  there  is  no  consensus  respecting  the  use  of 
these  terms.  Just  because  the  subject-matter  of  our  discipline  is 
so  much  in  dispute,  all  intelligent  progress  will  depend  on  its 
meaning.  One  reason  why  various  sociological  works  are  so  un- 
satisfactory is  the  fact  that  after  their  study  the  student  knows 
much  about  society,  but  cannot  define  society  itself,  the  very  object 
for  which  the  whole  research  was  made. 

For  the  same  reason  we  reject  the  notion  that  Sociology  treats 
merely  of  domestic,  ecclesiastical,  industrial,  political,  and  other 
institutions,  or  of  customs,  economics,  civics,  ethics,  and  religion. 
Sociology  as  the  science  of  society  includes  these  institutions  ;  but 
they  are  creations  of  society,  not  society  itself.  Sociology  is  not  an 
encyclopedia  of  these  creations,  nor  does  it  absorb  them.  Each 
remains  a  discipline  by  itself ;  but  Sociology  apprehends  them  as 
involved  in  its  principles,  and  determines  their  relation  to  one 
another  and  to  society.  A  philosophy  or  science  of  civil  law  does 
not  enumerate  every  law  that  was  ever  passed,  neither  does  it  take 
the  place  of  jurisprudence ;  it  aims  at  the  principle  and  reason 
involved  in  law.  So  Sociology  deals  only  with  the  essential  elements 
of  the  various  social  sciences  as  involved  in  the  science  of  society. 
It  must  confine  its  investigations  to  principles ;  these  must  be 
strictly  sociological,  that  is,  they  must  be  an  expression  and  inter- 


112     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

pretation  of  essential  elements  in  human  association.  We  might 
call  Sociology  the  science  of  the  social  essences  so  far  as  they  con- 
stitute a  totality ;  this  leaves  to  each  social  science  its  specific 
department,  and  keeps  the  sociologist  from  the  futile  attempt  to 
make  his  specialty  the  repository  of  everything  human.  As  in  logic 
we  have  the  laws  of  thought,  but  not  a  statement  of  aU  thoughts, 
so  in  Sociology  we  have  the  laws  of  association,  but  not  special 
sciences  of  the  different  associations. 

Society  as  a  totality  is  our  aim ;  we  want  the  interpretative 
essences  of  this  totality.  Many  difficulties  will  vanish  with  the 
clear  apprehension  of  this  aim.  We  can  illustrate  the  sociological 
point  of  view  by  comparing  it  with  that  of  a  special  social  science. 
Political  economy  seizes  an  economic  principle  as  economic;  Soci- 
ology seizes  it  as  sociological ;  political  economy  views  it  in  its 
abstract  or  isolated  economical  working ;  Sociology  views  it  as  not 
abstract  or  isolated,  but  as  correlated  to  all  other  social  factors ; 
the  political  economist  studies  economies  for  the  sake  of  economic 
science  ;  the  sociologist  for  the  sake  of  social  science ;  the  economist 
sees  in  economics  utility,  thrift,  wealth ;  the  sociologist  beholds 
society  in  economics ;  the  economist  wants  to  master  a  phase  of 
society  in  economics  ;  the  sociologist  wants  to  find  in  political 
economy  conditions  for  constructing  the  social  science. 

The  same  rule  applies  to  all  the  other  social  disciplines.  The 
sociologist  values  them  for  the  extraction  of  sociological  essences. 
lie  does  not  rest  in  economics  and  political  science,  as  the  economic 
and  political  specialists ;  but  he  passes  through  them  to  the  general 
social  science. 

In  order  to  make  clear  the  distinction  between  the  first  division 
and  the  second,  the  principles  of  society  and  the  historic  evolution 
of  these  principles,  we  again  refer  to  the  science  of  language. 

In  Professor  W.  D.  Whitney's  article  on  Philology  in  the  En- 
cyclop?edia  Britannica  a  distinction  is  made  between  language 
itself  and  the  development  of  the  different  languages.  The  power 
of  speech  and  the  relation  of  speech  to  ideas  is  a  different  subject 
from  that  of  the  evolution  of  language,  though  we  go  to  this  evolu- 
tion for  our  knowledge  of  the  power  of  speech.  In  considering 
language  per  se  Professor  Whitney  discusses  the  nature  of  lan- 
guage, the  cause  of  language,  the  voice,  imitation,  brute  speech 
and  human  speech,  language  and  culture,  and  many  similar  sub- 
jects, revealing  a  large  and  important  sphere  of  thought.     Now 


DIVISION  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  113 

just  as  in  philology  there  is  an  important  realm  for  language  per  se, 
so  in  Sociology  there  is  for  society  per  se ;  but  language  is  only  one 
of  the  social  factors  and  far  less  rich  in  content  than  society  itself. 
This  win  enable  the  beginner  to  see  that  our  first  division  is  not 
only  rich,  but  also  of  primary  importance.  Just  as  in  philology 
we  discuss  language  itself,  and  then  proceed  to  discuss  the  evolu- 
tion of  language,  so  we  adopt  the  same  procedure  in  Sociology 
respecting  society. 

It  would  not  be  necessary  to  place  this  primary  emphasis  on 
society  if  the  conception  were  simple ;  but  it  is  extremely  compli- 
cated and  therefore  requires  thorough  investigation. 

Another  lesson  is  taught  by  the  science  of  language.  After 
language  itself  has  been  explained,  philology  considers  the  evolu- 
tion of  language.  This  is  an  application  of  the  principles  dis- 
covered, showing  the  relation  of  the  different  families  of  language 
to  the  power  of  speech.  Thus  F.  Miiller  (see  "  Brockhaus' 
Konversadons-Lexikun,"  article  Sprachwissenschaft)  classifies  all  the 
languages  into  eighteen  groups.  These  grouj^s  are  investigated 
according  to  their  relation  to  one  another ;  but  the  complete  devel- 
opment of  any  group  is  not  the  province  of  the  science  of  language. 
Just  so  in  the  science  of  society  we  distinguish  between  the  evolu- 
tion of  society  as  a  part  of  Sociology,  and  the  history  and  particu- 
lar form  of  societies,  which  latter  are  left  to  other  disciplines. 

Incidentally  another  parallel  between  philology  and  Sociology 
may  be  noted.  The  article  just  referred  to  says  that  formerly 
philology  was  placed  among  the  natural  sciences  (by  Schleicher 
and  Max  IMiiller),  but  that  this  is  properly  abandoned  now  by  all 
linguists. 

The  distinction  between  social  and  sociological,  mentioned 
above,  is  important.  Social  is  the  more  comprehensive  term ;  all 
that  is  sociological  being  social,  but  not  all  that  is  social  being 
sociological.  Sociology  is  the  social  science ;  but  a  special  social 
science  is  not  sociological.  We  designate  as  social  whatever  per- 
tains to  society ;  but  as  sociological  only  that  which  pertains  to 
the  science  of  society.  Whoever  investigates  social  phenomena  is 
a  social  student;  he  becomes  a  sociologist  only  when  he  relates 
all  the  social  phenomena  so  as  to  form  the  social  system  or  the 
science  of  society.  Sociological  always  implies  that  the  point  of 
view  is  that  of  society  as  an  organism  ;  that  every  social  phenome- 
non is  viewed  in  its  relation  to  society  as  a  totality;  and  that 


114     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

each  social  factor  is  appreciated  as  au  integral  part  in  the  social 
system. 

A  man  may  study  French  and  not  be  a  philologist;  he  may 
likewise  study  social  subjects  and  not  be  a  sociologist. 

Charity  taken  by  itself ;  isolated  social  reforms ;  movements  in 
society  considered  as  severed  from  their  connection  with  society  as 
a  totality,  are  not  sociological.  This  term  should  be  used  in  the 
comprehensive,  organic,  and  scientific  sense  involved  in  Sociology, 
whence  it  is  derived. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Mental  Reasons  for  Division.  Its  Basis  in  the  Nature  of 
Things.  Its  Logical  Requirements.  Division  and  Analysis. 
Relation  of  Division  of  Contents  to  the  Details  of  those  Con- 
tents. Common  Neglect  of  Principles  on  •which  Divisions 
depend.  The  Definition  and  the  Division.  Description  of 
Society  and  Descriptive  Sociology.  Distinction  bet'ween 
Social  and  Sociological.  Ho-w  get  the  Division  of  our 
Subject?  "What  is  Society  p^^  se  or  in  itself?  Distinc- 
tion bet-ween  the  Idea  of  Society  and  Social  Phenomena. 
The  Sociological  View  of  the  Social  Sciences.  What  must 
be  - —  involving  Necessity  and  Universality  ;  what  is  —  the 
Actuality  ;  -what  ought  to  be  —  expressive  of  Value,  "Worth, 
Object  of  Aspiration,  Appeal  to  the  Will.  Our  Division  in 
physiological  and  medical  terms :  Social  Structure  and 
Functions  ;  Development  of  Structure  and  Exercise  of  Func- 
tions ;   Social  Therapeutics. 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         115 


CHAPTER  y. 

THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    SOCIETY  PER  SE. 

The  Problem.  After  tracing  the  genesis  of  the  concep- 
tion of  society  we  determined  the  comprehensive  sense  in 
which  society  is  the  subject-matter  of  Sociology.  How  shall 
we  treat  this  subject-matter?  The  answer  of  the  first 
division^  discussed  in  this  chapter^  is :  determine  the 
principles  of  society. 

This  requires  a  deeper  study  of  society,  to  which  all  that 
has  preceded  is  but  of  a  preparatory  character.  Is  the 
usual  interpretation  of  society  as  an  association  of  indi- 
viduals correct  and  final  ?  Society  is  a  union  ;  but  is  it 
really  individuals  that  are  united  ?  Can  we  even  conceive 
of  individuals,  consisting  of  body  and  soul,  as  permanently 
united  so  as  to  form  society?  One  man  in  Ungland, 
another  in  Australia,  a  third  in  the  United  States,  belong 
to  the  Society  of  Friends.  Tliey  have  never  seen,  or  heard 
of,  one  another.  Does  the  fact  that  they  belong  to  the  same 
society  mean  that  they  are  united  as  individuals,  the  totality 
of  their  personalities  being  absorbed,  or  only  that  certain 
qualities  or  energies  in  them  attach  them  to  the  same  society 
and  constitute  them  its  members? 

The  real  problem  is  the  differentiation  of  the  individual 
from  society  ;  such  an  analysis  of  him  as  will  discriminate 
the  individual  as  social  and  as  extra-social  (not  necessarily 
anti-social).  Each  one  can  solve  the  problem  by  deter- 
mining his  relation  to  the  associations  he  enters.  Let  him 
answer  the  question,  What  of  me  belongs  to  myself  as  an 


116     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

individual^  and  ivhat  of  me  belongs  to  the  societies  of  which 
I  am  a  member  ? 

Sociology  deals  with  principles.  By  principles  of  society 
we  mean  all  that  must  be  in  order  that  society  may  be. 
Our  first  division  considers  what  is  involved  in  society  per 
se ;  that  is,  in  society  itself,  in  the  very  idea  of  society,  as 
distinct  from  the  historic  evolution  of  societies  and  social 
ethics. 

The  problem  of  this  Chapter  therefore  is :  such  a  mas- 
tery of  society  itself  as  will  make  its  idea  definite,  and 
give  us  a  basis  of  social  evolution  and  of  what  society  ought 
to  be. 

What  would  require  elaborate  discussion  in  Sociology 
proper  can,  of  course,  be  given  only  in  outline  in  this 
Introduction. 

A.   Society. 

What  has  thus  far  been  said  is  preparatory  to  the 
discussion  of  the  subject-matter  of  Sociology.  It  is 
hardly  more  than  the  substitution  of  one  word  for 
another  to  say  that  human  society  is  human  associa- 
tion. The  very  thing  wc  want  to  know  is  what 
associates,  and  what  takes  place  in  the  process  of 
association. 

The  Individual  and  Society. 

Every  effort  to  interpret  society  as  composed  of  indi- 
viduals has  proved  a  signal  failure.  Yet  that  is  the 
universal  conception  of  society.^     If  personalities  them- 

^  Worcester  defines  it:  "A  union  of  many  in  one  general  interest.  A 
numlier  of  [)orsons  united  togetlier  by  mutual  consent,  in  order  to  deliberate, 
determine,  and  act  jointly  for  some  common  purpose."  Standard  Diction- 
ary: "  The  collective  body  of  persous  composing  a  community.  .  .  .  Any 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         117 

selves  are  taken  as  constituting  society,  then  an  asso- 
ciation is  supposed  to  be  expressed  by  the  persons 
belonging  to  it.  This  is  the  root  of  many  errors  and 
of  interminable  confusion. 

Strictly  speaking,  individuals  are  aggregated,  never 
associated.  We  can  speak,  as  is  usually  done,  of  men 
and  women  as  associated,  but  it  must  not  be  taken  liter- 
ally; the  expression  requires  explanation. 

Individuals  consist  of  body  and  soul.  In  this  sense 
individuals  may  assemble  and  form  a  congregation  or 
aggregation.  But  how  individuals  as  a  union  of  body 
and  soul  can  associate  or  coalesce  does  not  appear. 
The  presence  of  individuals  is  necessary  for  certain 
kinds  of  society;  but  the  aggregation  of  individuals  as 
the  condition  of  association  must  be  distinguished  from 
the  association  itself. 

Twenty  persons  in  a  town  agree  to  organize  a  liter- 
ary society.  Then  it  is  decided  to  organize  another 
society  to  study  the  archaeology  of  the  region,  and  only 
the  same  persons  join.  By  naming  the  persons  sepa- 
rately no  hint  is  given  that  a  literary  society  exists. 
The  fact  that  there  is  a  literary  society  does  not  show 
that  there  is  an  archceological  association.  The  same 
persons  may  form  a  dozen  other  societies,  showing  that 
no  one  society  absorbs  the  individuals.  Perhaps  no 
organizations  are  formed ;  in  that  case  certain  interests 
of  the  individuals  that  might  be  made  social  remain 
individual. 

Consider  the  literary  society  more  closely.     Is  it  a 

body  of  persons  connected  by  acquaintance,  friendship,  or  neighborhood." 
This  is  a  fair  sample  of  what  is  common  in  all  dictionaries  and  in  all  lan- 
guages. Thus  the  attention  is  concentrated  on  individuals  as  the  consti- 
tuent factors  of  society.  The  Bible  Societ\',  the  Sunday  School  Society, 
and  other  organizations  are  given  as  illustrations  that  society  is  composed 
of  persons  organized  or  associated  for  a  common  end. 


118     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

society  of  the  twenty  men  ?  Even  in  literature  each 
has  his  favorite  authors  and  holds  numerous  views 
which  the  others  do  not  share  and  he  does  not  mention. 
Besides,  he  has  many  other  interests  and  peculiarities 
which  lie  wholly  outside  of  the  sphere  of  the  society. 
Manifestly,  then,  it  is  a  mistake  to  say  that,  in  a 
literal  sense,  the  members  constitute  the  literary 
society;  the  truth  is  that  what  the  members  have  in 
common,  what  they  express  and  share,  and  what  be- 
comes an  object  of  united  pursuit  (the  purpose  of  the 
organization),  constitute  the  association ;  the  purely 
private  affairs  of  the  Individual  are  not  associative 
factors.  Perhaps  a  small  fraction  of  the  personality 
enters  the  literary  society. 

In  some  kinds  of  association  the  distinction  between 
the  associative  and  non-associative  factors  is  marked. 
Men  form  industrial  organizations  for  the  purpose  of 
promoting  certain  interests  which  they  have  in  com- 
mon. But  the  industries  are  pursued  for  the  sake  of 
personal  advantages;  hence  the  same  men  may  co- 
operate to  secure  a  tariff  or  other  legislation,  or  to  get 
cheaper  transportation,  while  each  competes  with  the 
others  to  sell  the  most  goods  and  reap  the  largest 
profits.  So  far  is  the  organization  from  absorbing  the 
individual  in  this  case  that  he  may  antagonize  all  the 
other  members  in  every  sphere  except  where  their 
interests  harmonize.  Indeed,  industrial  combinations 
are,  as  a  rule,  valued  by  each  for  the  sake  of  the 
private  benefit  to  be  derived  from  them.  Disintegra- 
tion takes  place  so  soon  as  members  find  that  they  can 
accomplish  their  own  purposes  better  by  withdrawal. 

The  same  differentiation  applies  essentially  to  every 
possible  association.  In  no  instance  is  it  composed  of 
individuals  1+1+1+1  and  so  on  indefinitely,  but  only 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         119 

of  SO  much  of  each  individual  as  actually  enters  the 
society.  What  unites  the  members  of  a  labor  organi- 
zation who  never  see  one  another  ?  Their  common 
interest  as  laborers ;  as  private  individuals,  in  religion, 
in  politics,  and  in  many  other  spheres,  their  views  may 
diverge  and  be  wholly  foreign  to  the  labor  organization. 
The  members  form  the  organization ;  but  the  organiza- 
tion does  not  absorb  the  members. 

The  individual,  therefore,  is  more  than  what  goes  out 
into  any  society  he  joins ;  indeed,  he  is  something 
besides  all  the  societies  to  which  he  belongs.  The 
thought  which  is  not  communicated,  the  feeling  which 
is  not  expressed  to  another,  the  purpose  which  no  one 
shares,  the  invention  which  dies  with  the  inventor,  are 
individual  and  private,  but  not  social. 

The  individual  always  acts  as  a  unit,  no  matter 
whether  in  private  or  social  affairs,  whether  alone  or 
in  society.  This,  however,  does  not  imply  that  when 
he  acts  as  a  unit  he  includes  in  one  act  all  he  is  and 
all  his  interests.  The  one  line  along  which  a  particu- 
lar act  moves  must  not  be  mistaken  for  the  circle  of  a 
man's  thoughts,  interests,  and  purposes. 

Our  analysis  of  the  individual  which  differentiates 
between  him  as  private  and  as  social,  is  confirmed  by 
the  consciousness  of  each  person.  To  the  statement 
that  he  is  a  member  of  society  a  plus  must  be  added: 
he  is  something  besides.  The  entire  individuality  can- 
not go  out  into  society;  his  selfhood  makes  this  impos- 
sible. A  great  difference  exists  in  individuals,  some 
yielding  more  of  themselves  to  society  than  others. 
But  all  have  a  large  sphere  of  action  which  remains 
private.  Men  can  be  socialized ;  that  is,  certain  ele- 
ments in  them  which  are  still  private  may  be  made 
social. 


120     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

This  differentiation  we  emphasize  because  both  essen- 
tial and  fundamental  for  a  correct  apprehension  of 
society.  Men  may  keep  to  themselves  some  things 
because  they  are  egoistic,  selfish ;  others  they  refuse  to 
share  because  solely  private  affairs.  The  altruist  who 
shares  most  may  distinguish  more  sharply  between 
private  and  social  affairs  than  the  egoist.  His  right 
to  his  own  is  made  more  clear  by  the  fact  that  he  gives 
to  society  all  it  can  claim.  The  distinction  between 
Avhat  is  private  and  social  in  the  same  person  becomes 
manifest  when  we  observe  how  money,  land,  business, 
pleasures,  can  be  treated  as  purely  individual,  or  can 
be  socialized  by  sharing  them  with  others. 

Our  analysis  does  not  take  the  individual  out  of  society,  but  de- 
termines his  exact  relation  to  it.  Society  does  not  absorb  the 
individual,  but  only  so  much  of  him  as  is  social.  Sociology,  there- 
fore, does  not  include  the  individual  as  an  individual,  hut  considers 
him  solely  so  far  as  he  is  a  social  factor.  For  the  psychology  and 
ethics  of  the  individual  a  distinct  sphere  is  thus  left  by  Sociology, 
just  as  vi'as  the  case  before  this  discipline  was  thought  of. 

Hydrogen  and  oxygen  coalesce  and  form  water;  individuals 
never  can  thus  coalesce  and  form  society.  A  drop  of  water  falls 
into  a  stream,  forms  part  of  it,  is  absorbed  by  it,  and  is  nothing  else 
than  what  it  is  in  the  stream ;  but  no  human  individual  is  thus  ab- 
sorbed by,  or  lost  in,  society.  The  hand  is  part  of  the  bodily  or- 
ganism and  cannot  live  when  its  organic  connection  with  the  rest 
of  the  body  is  severed ;  but  an  individual  may  be  cast  on  a  lonely 
island  and  live.  As  an  individual  he  may  exist  for  years  though 
there  be  not  another  human  being  to  draw  out  his  social  powers. 
We  cannot  therefore  agree  with  Mr.  L.  Stephen  when  ("  Science 
of  Ethics,"  110)  he  says:  "It  is  as  true  that  man  is  dependent  on 
his  fellows  as  that  a  limb  is  dependent  upon  the  body."  Without 
society  (the  family  of  which  he  is  a  member)  he  could  not  have 
been  born,  and  in  this  sense  he  is  as  dependent  as  is  the  limb  upon 
the  body.  But  a  man  who  withdraws  from  the  actual  social  or- 
ganism may  live,  while  it  is  impossible  for  the  limb  to  live  when 
severed  from  the  l)odv. 


TUE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         121 

We  imist  likewise  distinguish  between  humanity  and  hvinian 
society.  Human  society  is  coextensive,  but  not  synonymous,  with 
luimanity.  In  mankind  we  include  every  individual  and  all  of 
liim  ;  but  in  human  society  we  include  every  individual  only  so 
far  as  he  has  associative  elements.  What  is  not  associated  with 
others  is  not  a  social  factor.  Thei'efore  Sociology  does  not  indis- 
criminately discuss  humanity,  but  only  so  far  as  associated  and 
therefore  a  society. 

Lamartine  somewhere  says,  that  "  history  is  neither  more  nor 
less  than  biography  on  a  large  scale."  Another  uudiscriminating 
generalization,  and  therefore  only  in  part  true.  Biography  may 
be  called  the  history  of  an  individual ;  but  never  can  biography, 
however  enlai'ged,  be  the  synonyme  of  history  in  the  usual  sense. 
Biography  treats  of  the  individual;  human  history,  of  society. 
The  former  considers  what  is  personal,  no  matter  what  its  social 
lelation ;  but  to  history  an  individual  belongs  only  so  far  as  he 
sustains  relations  to  his  fellow-men.  In  history  we  have  a  record 
of  what  has  entered  into  tlie  social  organism  as  an  influential  and 
aljiding  factor.  There  is  biography  which  is  not  history,  because 
there  are  individual  elements  which  are  not  tributary  to  the  cui-- 
rents  of  history.  There  is  an  individual  culture  which  is  not 
social  culture  ;  the  individual  may  have  personal  excellences 
which  do  not  enter  the  social  organism  and  therefore  do  not  pro- 
mote the  elevation  of  society. 

Since  there  are  individual  elements  which  are  not  social,  it  is 
clear  that  the  individual  is  not  absorbed  by  society.  In  the  one 
hundred  individuals  of  an  organization  there  remains  much  that 
does  not  enter  the  organization.  But  is  there  not  also  something 
in  the  oi'ganization  which  is  not  found  in  the  one  hundred  indi- 
viduals as  isolated?  If  there  is,  then  that  constitutes  the  social 
element;  that  is,  if  we  can  discover  what  distinguishes  the  one 
hundred  associated  persons  from  what  they  are  when  isolated,  it 
will  give  us  the  associative  element  and  the  essence  of  society. 

What,  then,  have  we  in  the  society  formed  by  one  hundred  men 
which  did  not  exist  in  the  one  hundred  before  the  organization  ? 

We  call  the  new  product  society,  something  that  did  not 
exist  in  the  isolated  individuals.  The  new  factor  is  association ; 
the  individuals,  we  say,  leave  their  isolation,  iniite  for  some  pur- 
pose; something  which  each  was  interested  in  before,  but  merely 
as  an  indi-\ndual,  is  now  made  the  common  interest  of  all,  so  that 


122   lyriiODUCTioN  to  study  of  sociology. 

they  share  the  same  aim  with  one  another,  commvinicate  their 
sentiments,  plan  and  work  together.  The  supreme  idea  of  the 
organization  may  have  been  in  eacli  mind  before ;  but  now  it  be- 
comes a  bond  of  union  between  them  ;  what  was  formerly  a  private 
possession  now  becomes  common  property.  The  central  thought 
of  the  individuals  receives  prominence  by  the  very  fact  that  it  is 
made  the  nucleus  of  an  organization.  Let  us  suppose  that  the 
one  hundi'ed  unite  to  ward  off  an  enemy.  Each  while  he  remained 
alone  might  want  the  enemy  defeated ;  the  union  of  each  with  the 
other  ninety-nine  is  the  new  element.  Now  a  common  purpose 
unites  them ;  it  leads  to  action  and  reaction  on  one  another  —  to 
interaction  —  to  planning  for  protection,  to  offence  and  defence, 
may  lead  to  war,  and  perhaps  it  is  the  first  step  in  forming  an 
army  and  a  state. 

This  makes  it  evident  that  in  the  society  there  is  something  dis- 
tinct from  the  sum  of  the  one  hundred  individuals,  just  as  in  the 
sum  of  the  individuals  there  is  something  which  is  not  in  the 
society.  You  do  not  see  the  society  when  you  see  the  individuals ; 
all  you  see  is  the  aggregation  of  the  individuals ;  society  is  not  an 
entity.  Some  would  say  that  society  is  a  relation  of  individuals. 
But  this  is  not  true ;  it  is  only  a  relation  of  certain  elements  i  n 
individuals,  not  of  the  individualities  as  total  personalities.  Be- 
sides, the  notion  of  a  relation  of  individuals  is  too  general,  too 
vague,  too  empty,  so  shadowy  that  we  cannot  grasp  it.  To  make 
it  definite  we  must  show  ivhat  the  relation  consists  of,  giving  its 
substance.  Society  is  a  reality  ;  it  is  an  actual,  working  force,  and 
must  be  apprehended  as  such.  This  force  is  personal ;  that  is,  it 
consists  of  so  much  of  the  personality  as  is  given  to  society.  The 
one  hundred  persons  really  act  on  one  another ;  this  is  the  new 
force  not  exerted  in  their  isolation.  The  new  relation  constituted 
when  the  society  is  formed  is  one  of  interaction.  The  force  is 
definite  and  in  the  best  sense  real.  Each  learns  from  the  others 
what  their  motive  is,  how  they  expect  to  realize  it ;  there  is  an  ex- 
change of  ideas,  schemes  are  proposed  and  discussed,  plans  are  laid 
and  executed.  The  intellect,  heart,  and  will  are  involved,  likewise 
the  body,  property,  and  the  use  of  various  natural  means  for  the 
purpose  of  the  association.  So  far  as  the  members  agree,  they  en- 
courage one  another  and  co-operate ;  so  far  as  they  differ  in  opinion, 
they  may  learn  from  one  another,  inciting  to  discussion  and  devel- 
opment, perhaps  also  to  conflict. 


TUE  PRINCIPLES   OE  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         1:^3 

Society,  then,  is  not  a  vague  relation,  nor  is  it  a  relation  of  indi- 
viduals, but  of  certain  elements  which  individuals  possess,  of  per- 
sonal energies  which  act  on  one  another.  Society  as  an  organism 
of  individuals  is  inconceivable ;  but  as  an  organism  of  personal 
forces  which  become  social,  which  act  and  react  between  individ- 
uals, and  make  what  is  the  private  possession  of  one  the  common 
possession  of  others,  association  becomes  definite. 

Sociology  therefore  deals  with  the  energies  of  the  individual 
which  become  social  by  acting  on  other  individuals.  In  all  social 
inquiry,  therefore,  the  investigation  pertains  to  the  social  forces 
involved,  and  to  individuals  only  so  far  as  possessors  of  these  forces. 
Men  can  be  known  in  society,  but  only  by  the  characteristics  they 
exercise.  We  study  organizations  according  to  the  social  energies 
concentrated  in  them.  In  a  political  society  the  political  bonds 
are  the  objects  of  inquiry  ;  in  an  economic  society  the  economic 
bonds ;  in  a  church  the  religious  ties ;  always  what  men  have  in 
common  as  members  of  society,  not  what  remains  private  and 
unshared. 

By  ignoring  this  distinction  errors  of  judgment  become  com- 
mon. A  man  who  gives  a  large  sum  to  a  charitable  association  re- 
ceives credit  for  liberality ;  yet  his  essence  may  be  covetousness. 
What  he  gives  is  for  selfish  ends,  to  get  more  customers,  perhaps. 
His  public  act  is  social ;  his  motive  is  private.  The  knowledge  of 
it  may  die  with  him,  though  some  effects  of  it  are  likely  to  appear 
in  his  conduct. 

In  the  case  of  a  Catholic  priest,  we  have  a  sharp  distinction 
between  his  social  and  his  private  function.  His  very  position 
gives  him  a  place  before  the  public ;  yet  his  vow  of  secrecy  obliges 
him  to  keep  sacredly  from  others  what  is  confided  to  him  in  the 
confessional. 

Such  illustrations  could  be  multiplied  indefinitely.  Each  one 
can,  however,  find  in  his  own  conduct  abundant  evidence  that 
social  action  is  distinguished  from  that  which  is  purely  individual 
or  private.  Much  in  every  life  is  exclusively  personal,  not  being 
shared  even  with  the  most  intimate  fiiend.  The  variety  of  social 
action  may  depend  on  density  of  population ;  thus  an  individual's 
social  relations  in  a  city  are  likely  to  be  more  varied  than  in  the 
country.  But  individual  and  anti-social  action  in  a  city  can  also 
be  greater  than  in  the  country.  The  man  in  a  sparsely  settled 
community  may  be  almost  limited  to  family  association  ;  but  he 


124     IXTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

may  share  liis  views  and  purposes  and  labors  in  that  more  fidly 
than  the  man  in  the  city  shares  his  views  and  purposes  and  labors 
with  all  his  varied  associates. 

The  working  of  the  social  energies  or  of  the  associative  factors 
involves  a  history.  Their  interaction  results  in  a  process.  It  is 
this  process  which  is  meant  when  we  speak  of  social  development. 
Sociology  deals  with  the  associative  and  socializing  forces,  with  the 
society  they  form,  and  with  the  development  of  this  society.  The 
history  of  society  is  a  history  of  the  interaction  of  the  social 
forces.  By  social  forces  we  simply  mean  personal  forces  which  act 
socially,  together  with  the  social  effects  produced  by  the  personal 
'  forces  acting  socially.  Money,  a  product  of  society,  is  called  a 
social  force. 

"While  society  is  never  to  be  confounded  with  the  individuals  in 
it,  they  contain  the  essential  foi'ces  of  society.  The  society  depends 
largely  on  the  character  and  aims  of  individuals.  Those  intent 
only  on  food  will  organize  to  obtain  food ;  those  intent  on  science 
will  organize  for  scientific  purposes.  But  the  society  also  influ- 
ences individuals,  not  only  its  members,  but  likewise  outsiders. 
It  is  thus  clear  that  individual  progress  and  social  progress  are  inti- 
mately related,  though  not  identical. 

The  first  sociological  problem  is  chiefly  this :  the  associative 
elements  in  human  aggregation  ;  that  is,  if  men  are  thrown  together 
(aggregated),  what  tends  to  socialize  them  ?  Each  comes  as  an 
individual,  but  his  total  personality  does  not  enter  any  organiza- 
tion that  may  be  formed ;  what,  however,  is  there  in  the  individuals 
that  can  be  shared  and  made  an  interactive  force  ? 

Thoughts,  feelings,  aims,  an  endless  variety,  can  be  communi- 
cated. Perhaps  we  might  speak  of  thought  as  the  bones,  feelings 
as  the  nerves,  and  volitions  as  the  muscles  of  the  social  organism ; 
or  we  could  speak  of  all  as  the  tissues  of  society.  From  these 
social  factors  we  then  distinguish  those  parts  of  the  individual 
which  do  not  enter  the  social  organism.  A  treasure  buried  in  the 
soul  differs  from  a  treasure  in  circulation. 

This  does  not  iiiterfei-e  with  the  fact  that  the  individual  must 
in  his  origin  be  considered  as  wholly  a  social  product,  and  largely 
so  likewise  in  his  training  and  development.  Being  absolutely 
dependent  on  the  environment  in  early  life,  and  born  into  such 
social  achievements  as  language,  literature,  economic  conditions, 
schools,  the  cliurch,  the  state,  it  can  almost  be  said  that  he  is  nuide 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         125 

by  society.  His  very  constitution  as  the  result  of  heredity  is  a 
social  product.  But  this  does  not  eliminate  the  individual  as  dis- 
tinct from  society.  He  may  do  something  for  himself,  educate 
himself,  choose  his  own  course,  and  thus  exercise  his  selfhood,  and 
prove  that  he  is  not  absolutely  dependent  on  social  influence.  He 
can  even  oppose  society  or  lead  a  hermit  life.  Unquestionably 
Kant's  *'  Kritik  of  Pure  Keason  "  could  not  have  been  produced 
unless  others  had  thought  before  its  author ;  but  whatever  social 
element  might  be  discovered  in  the  work,  much  of  it  is  singularly 
Kantian  and  became  a  social  factor  only  after  he  had  produced 
the  book. 

Some  social  movements  absorb  individuals  more  than  others. 
In  the  great  migratory  hordes  which  came  into  Europe  from  Asia 
at  the  beginning  of  our  era,  the  individual  had  to  move  with  the 
mass  or  be  lost.  The  organic  connection  of  each  soldier  iu  the 
German  army  with  the  total  organism  is  very  marked ;  and  yet 
when  thoroughly  disciplined  he  is  also  expected  to  be  prepared 
for  individual  action  in  an  emergency,  which  individual  action  is, 
however,  in  harmony  with  the  army  itself.  But  many  associations 
absorb  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  forces  of  their  members. 
Thus  ten  societies  to  which  a  man  belongs  may  absorb  one-tenth  of 
his  forces;  another  tenth  may  be  absorbed  by  social  relations  in  an 
unorganized  form  (such  as  company,  social  gatherings)  ;  two  tenths 
of  his  forces  may  be  given  to  the  community,  the  church,  and  the 
state  ;  this  would  leave  six  tenths  for  his  family  and  for  private 
(individual)  affairs.  By  thus  analyzing  the  forces  which  an  indi- 
vidual exercises  we  see  with  what  limitations  the  statement  must 
be  taken  that  an  individual  belongs  to  a  society  ;  perhaps  one  hun- 
dredth of  him  belongs.  Even  organizations  so  absorbing  as  the 
Catholic  Church  and  the  social  democracy  leave  a  large  sphere  for 
individual  as  distinct  from  social  activity. 

It  is  a  common  opinion  that  society  is  as  its  units  (individuals), 
and  on  this  theory  social  systems  are  founded.  Yet  taken  literally 
the  statement  is  misleading.  A  dozen  savants  form  an  association 
for  recreation.  They  eat,  drink,  smoke,  have  games,  and  sedulously 
avoid  learned  subjects.  Can  you  by  knowing  the  individual  savants 
determine  what  society  they  have  organized  ?  That  society  can  only 
be  interpreted  by  its  aim,  by  the  associative  forces  which  enter  and 
constitute  it.  Therefore  it  is  not  like  the  individuals,  but  only 
like  the  energies  of  the  individuals  united  in  the  recreative 
association. 


126     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Only,  tlien,  if  individuals  were  wholly  absorbed  by  an  association 
would  that  association  be  as  the  individuals.  But  no  association 
can  absolutely  absorb  the  membei's  ;  therefore  in  every  instance  the 
above  rule  applies,  that  the  character  of  an  association  is  not  deter- 
mined by  the  members,  but  solely  by  the  social  forces  of  the  mem- 
bers, and  these  social  forces  constitute  the  association.  The  social 
energies  thus  furnish  the  scope  of  sociological  inquiry. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Why  does  Social  Analysis  usually  stop  vrith  the  Indi- 
vidual ?  What  are  the  Social  Forces  ?  The  Individual 
and  the  Social  Personality.  What  is  there  in  Isolated  Indi- 
viduals that  is  not  in  Society  ?  What  in  Society  that  is 
not  in  Isolated  Individuals  ?  Difference  bet^veen  Biography 
and  History.  Individuals  no  sure  Test  of  the  Association 
they  form.  Ho"w  can  Associations  be  tested  by  the  Forces 
that  enter  them  ?  The  exact  Sociological  Problem :  not 
one  of  Individuals,  but  of  the  Interaction  of  Social  Forces. 
Different  Parts  of  Individuals  absorbed  by  different  Asso- 
ciations (economic,  political,  literary,  etc.).  Difference  in 
respect  to  the  Amount  of  the  Individual  ■wrhich  Associations 
absorb. 

SOCIATION. 

Men  are  not,  and  cannot  be,  literally  united  in 
society;  we  say  they  are,  but  then  we  must  define 
exactly  what  we  mean.  Their  bodies  are  not  united ; 
their  minds  do  not  coalesce;  they  remain  distinct  as 
personalities.  The  individual  personality  in  the  same 
man  remains  distinct  from  his  social  personality;  the 
strong  man  may  at  the  same  time  grow  in  individuality 
and  in  sociality.  In  his  private  life  (in  all  that  per- 
tains to  him  solely  as  an  individual),  the  individual 
personality  of  a  man  acts;  in  society,  the  social  per- 
sonality. After  what  has  l)ocn  said,  we  shall  not  be 
misunderstood  in  stating  that  society  consists  of  social 


THE  PPJNCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         127 

personalities  as  distinguished  from  individual  or  private 
Itersonalitics.  This  is  only  another  way  of  saying  what 
was  said  before,  that  society  does  not  consist,  strictly 
speaking,  of  individuals,  but  only  of  so  much  of  them 
as  is  associated.  Social  we  use  here  in  the  sense  of  all 
personal  powers  which  act  on  others,  whether  co-opera- 
tively or  antagonistically. 

In  order  to  make  clear  the  notion  that  society  con- 
sists not  of  (undiscriminated)  personalities,  but  of 
social  personalities,  a  new  word  is  needed,  a  word  to 
designate  what  men  share,  what  associates  them,  what 
interacts  as  a  social  force.  Association  refers  to  the 
associative  factor,  and  would  designate  what  we  aim  to 
mark  as  distinct,  were  that  word  confined  to  the  asso- 
ciative element  as  the  essence  of  society.  Association 
is,  however,  used  for  a  union  of  men,  thus  promoting 
the  old  error  that  men  are  united.  But  we  seek  a  term 
which  rejects  the  old  error,  which  gives  the  idea  of 
association,  but  confines  this  association  to  what  is 
actually  associated.  Now  it  happens  that  sociate  is 
used  in  the  same  sense  as  associate ;  but  sociation  is  not 
in  use.  This  noun  we  now  form.  We  use  it  to  desig- 
nate those  personal  forces  which  interact  between  men ; 
to  indicate  what  men  share,  what  associates.  It 
stands  for  all  that  makes  society  as  distinguished  from 
the  sum  of  individuals.  Sociation  thus  gives  the 
essence  of  society  (that  which  makes  society  society), 
and  differentiates  it  from  all  other  objects.  So  far  as 
the  personality  is  concerned,  this  new  term  distin- 
guishes between  the  private  and  the  social  factors  in 
men.  Sociation  deals  exclusively  with  the  social  per- 
sonality. Regarding  a  man  as  social  plus  private,  it 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  latter  but  to  eliminate  it 
from  the  sphere  of  its  inquiries.     When  we  say  that 


128     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

certain  elements  in  men  are  extra-social,  we  do  not 
mean  that  they  are  necessarily  anti-social,  but  only 
that  they  do  not  belong  to  the  social  energies  which 
constitute  society.  Sociation  expresses  the  associative 
energies  as  distinct  from  what  is  not  associative.  In 
association  men  are  conceived  as  the  dominant  factors; 
but  in  sociation  the  forces  in  men  which  become  social 
are  dominant.  The  opposite  of  association  is  men  in 
isolation;  the  opposite  of  sociation  is  individual  powers 
unassociated.  Thus  sociation  always  considers  indi- 
viduals only  so  far  as  they  have  associative,  inter- 
active factors,  leaving  a  large  realm  of  the  individual 
unconsidered. 

Suppose  I  have  a  dozen  steel  horse-shoe  magnets 
lying  on  my  table,  for  the  purpose  of  studying  magnet- 
ism. How  do  I  contemplate  them  ?  Simply  so  far  as 
they  are  magnets,  so  far  as  their  poles  have  attractive 
and  repulsive  forces.  The  fact  that  the  magnets  are 
steel  concerns  me  only  so  far  as  steel  is  related  to  the 
magnetic  forces.  I  might  consider  the  steel  by  itself, 
its  composition,  its  origin,  its  quality,  its  weight,  its 
relation  to  other  metals,  etc.  ;  but  then  I  should  have 
to  enter  other  departments  than  that  of  magnetism. 
The  steel  in  one  horse-shoe  docs  not  pass  over  to  the 
steel  in  another  horse-shoe ;  it  is  only  the  magnetic 
force  that  interacts ;  this  T  a])stract  from  the  steel  itself 
and  make  the  object  of  inquiry. 

Let  the  twelve  horse-shoes  represent  twelve  indi- 
viduals. Sociation  does  not  consider  them  as  indi- 
viduals, but  only  that  in  them  which  interacts  between 
them;  it  drops  the  individuals  as  individuals,  for  the 
purpose  of  concentrating  the  attention  on  the  attractive 
and  repulsive  forces  of  their  magnetism  which  consti- 
tute society. 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         129 

Sociation  therefore  deals  with  social  energy,  and 
with  individuals  only  as  repositories  of  this  energy. ^ 

In  some  cases  the  bond  of  union  is  so  definite  and 
simple  as  to  be  at  once  apparent.  In  a  society  for 
vocal  culture  or  in  a  choir,  in  an  art  society  or  scien- 
tific association,  in  an  economic  combination  or  labor 
union,  the  specific  and  limited  character  of  the  aim  and 
of  the  force  exercised  is  unmistakable.  In  every  such 
instance,  especially  in  a  choir,  it  is  striking  that  the 
association  is  of  individuals  only  as  the  possessors  of 
the  particular  force  used. 

By  thus  making  society  consist  of  what  is  actually 
social,  really  interactive,  and  of  nothing  else,  we  get 
the  fundamental  knowledge  respecting  the  relation  of 
individuals  to  society.  Those  who  say  that  society 
consists  of  individuals,  and  mean  what  they  say,  can- 
not discriminate  between  what  is  individual  and  what 
social  in  the  same  personality.  If  society  is  truly  an 
organism  of  individuals,  the  totality  of  the  individuals 
must  be  absorbed  by  the  organism.  Others,  however, 
emphasize  the  individual  to  the  neglect  of  the  organ- 
ism, as  if  he  had  no  essential  social  relations.  The 
conflict  ceases  so  soon  as  society  is  discovered  to  con- 
sist only  of  so  much  of  individuals  as  is  socially  inter- 
active. Only  that  part  of  me  which  is  literary  belongs 
to  the  literary  society  which  I  help  to  form ;  all  in  me 
that  is  not  literary  is  not  absorl^ed  by  the  society,  but 
belongs  to  another  sphere.  Since  there  is  an  indi- 
vidual   (private)   personality  distinct  from  the  social 

1  If  we  regard  physics,  the  science  of  energy,  as  inclusive  of  the  mental 
powers,  we  might  adapt  to  our  purpose  Comte's  definition  of  Sociology 
as  "  social  physics,"  though  not  in  his  sense.  The  science  of  social 
energies  is  a  good  definition  of  Sociology ;  but  social  physics  seems  to 
imply  only  physical  force,  and  is  tlierefore  objectionable. 

9 


130     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

personality,  a  man  cannot  properly  be  called  an  organ 
of  society,  because  he  is  something  besides  such  an 
organ;  he  has  elements  which  are  not  social.  The 
individual  is  an  organ  of  society  in  the  same  sense  that 
the  Capitol  in  Washington  is  a  Senate  Chamber.  It  is 
a  Senate  Chamber,  but  also  much  more. 

Our  view  of  sociation  as  distinct  from  association  is 
proved  correct  by  applying  it  to  various  social  forms 
and  controversies.  Not  only  docs  it  give  new  interpre- 
tations of  what  is  otherwise  obscure,  but  it  also  settles 
certain  disputes  otherwise  interminable. 

Let  us  apply  the  explanation  here  given  to  the  old 
dispute  between  individualism  and  socialism,^  The 
point  is  whether  the  individual  or  society  shall  be 
regarded  as  supreme.  Special  prominence  is  given  to 
the  subject  in  economics  in  connection  with  the  laissez- 
faire  theory.  So  long  as  the  individual  is  considered 
in  his  totality  as  a  personality,  the  controversy  cannot 
be  settled ;  because  as  such  he  is  independent  of  society 
and  also  dependent. 

But  analyze  the  personality ;  recognize  certain  ele- 
ments in  the  man  which  he  shares  with  others,  and 
which  thus  become  social,  while  other  elements  remain 
individual  and  private;  then  the  question  is  settled. 
It  is  at  once  seen  that  in  that  case  individualism  and 
socialism  are  no  longer  antagonistic,  but  each  has  a 
sphere  in  which  it  is  supreme.  There  is  a  realm  which 
belongs  to  a  man  as  an  individual :  his  intellect,  his 
conscience,  his  feelings,  his  private  affairs.  This  realm 
as  the  sphere  of  individual  freedom  and  individual 
rights  is  to  be  guarded  sacredly  against  intrusion  and 
interference.  He  may  be  instructed  and  persuaded ; 
but  in  these   sacredly   personal  affairs  he  cannot  be 

1  Socialism  is  here  used  in  the  general  sense  of  social  control. 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         131 

coerced.     This  every  just  law  recognizes.     Here  indi- 
vidualism reigns  and  must  maintain  its  dominion. 

The  same  individual,  however,  has  a  definite  relation 
to  society,  and  the  social  elements  in  him  are  as  dis- 
tinctly marked  as  the  private.  As  a  social  personality, 
he  moves  in  the  realm  where  socialism  reigns ;  that  is, 
social  laws  prevail  here,  just  as  personal  or  private 
laws  in  the  other  realm.  If  he  wants  to  speak  with  his 
fellows,  he  must  use  their  language ;  he  must  adapt 
himself  to  them  or  them  to  himself  (both  processes  are 
social),  in  order  to  associate  with  them.  In  other 
words,  he  must  adapt  himself  to  social  laws  in  the 
social  sphere.  He  may  go  as  he  pleases  while  alone, 
but  in  a  crowd  he  must  go  with  the  crowd,  or  as  it  sees 
fit  to  let  him  go.  If  he  takes  the  left  side  of  the  bridge 
at  Dresden  to  cross  the  Elbe,  he  is  jostled  by  the  crowd 
coming  the  other  way.  Every  few  steps  he  is  greeted 
with  "  Rechts  gehen  !  "  and  if  he  does  not  go  to  the  right, 
on  the  other  side  of  the  bridge,  a  policeman  may  take 
him  there,  in  order  that  he  may  move  with  and  not 
against  the  multitude.  This  is  but  an  illustration  of 
the  proverb,  that  in  Rome  one  must  do  as  the 
Romans  do. 

Since  therefore  individualism  and  socialism  are 
both  justified,  having  distinct  spheres  instead  of  being 
antagonistic,  the  old  controversy  as  to  which  shall 
prevail  is  settled.  Both  are  to  prevail,  but  each  in  its 
specific  sphere.  As  a  principle,  each  becomes  false  and 
unjust  only  when  it  encroaches  on  the  sphere  of  the 
other.  The  new  problem  which  confronts  us  in  place 
of  the  old  controversy  is  this:  how  much  in  the  per- 
sonality is  purely  individual,  a  private  matter  and 
therefore  a  man's  own  affair,  which  society  may  in- 
fluence but  cannot  control  ?     And  how  much  is  social. 


132     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

belongs  to  society  and  therefore  subject  to  social 
control ? 

We  now  have  a  law  of  universal  application  to  the 
individual  and  to  society.  The  individual  (so  far  as 
social)  acts  on  society,  and  society  acts  on  the  indi- 
vidual; but  the  line  between  individual  and  social  con- 
trol is  distinctly  marked.  Henceforth  the  aim  should 
be  to  individualize  all  that  is  individual,  and  to  social- 
ize all  that  is  social.  Light  is  thus  thrown  likewise 
on  education.  The  individual  is  to  be  developed  to 
the  utmost  for  his  own  sake;  education  is  to  aim  at 
the  best  personality.  He  has  value  in  himself,  and 
this  value  is  to  be  unfolded  to  the  greatest  worthiness. 
But  he  is  also  a  member  of  society,  and  therefore  to  be 
educated  for  social  ends.  His  individual  perfection 
and  his  social  perfection  are  to  be  organically  united, 
so  that  his  individual  perfection  makes  him  the  more 
perfect  socially,  and  that  his  social  perfection  exalts 
him  as  an  individual. 

The  law  established  applies  to  politics,  to  business, 
and  to  all  social  affairs.  In  every  department  we  must 
distinguish  between  what  is  private  and  what  social,  in 
the  personality.  It  is  one  and  the  same  personality, 
but  viewed  in  different  aspects,  now  self-centred,  then 
going  out  into  society.  The  demand  is  equally  impera- 
tive that  there  be  the  greatest  individuality,  and  the 
most  perfect  sociality.  Where  the  private  and  the 
social  elements  are  properly  hai-monized,  the  strongest 
individuality  is  likewise  the  strongest  social  power. 

Our  analysis  of  the  individual  into  private  and  social 
functions  removes  another  common  error.  The  state- 
ment is  constantly  made  that  by  entering  society  the 
individual  sacrifices  some  of  his  liberty.  Only  if 
society  is  false  will  it  demand  that  personal  liberty  be 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         133 

sacrificed.  If  it  is  meant  that  in  society  an  individual 
cannot  act  as  if  he  were  isolated,  the  statement  simply 
means  that  he  cannot  act  contrary  to  the  nature  of 
things.  In  society  a  man  cannot  act  as  if  he  were  out 
of  society,  for  the  reason  that  he  is  in  it  and  not  out  of 
it.  No  true  society  interferes  with  the  freedom  inhe- 
rent in  man,  but  recognizes  and  encourages  that  free- 
dom. By  passing  from  isolation  into  social  relations, 
the  individual  changes  his  conditions,  but  does  not  lose 
his  freedom.  Personally,  in  his  private  affairs,  he  is 
as  free  as  ever  he  was.  But  while  he  retains  all  the 
real  freedom  he  had  in  isolation,  his  life  is  augmented 
by  entering  society.  Besides  the  real  freedom  he 
retains,  he  now  sustains  social  relations  and  enters 
upon  social  action.  Indeed,  we  may  well  question 
whether  freedom  applies  to  men  isolated.  Freedom 
from  what  ?  It  is  in  society,  where  men  can  maintain 
their  views  in  the  face  of  false  restraints,  that  freedom 
manifests  itself. 

Another  error  has  been  promoted  by  the  theory  that 
the  individual  is  absorbed  by  society.  It  has  been 
claimed  that  individuality  will  disappear  as  socializa- 
tion advances.  Hardly  a  more  serious  objection  could 
be  urged  against  socialization.  Some  claim  that  to 
associate  is  to  stoop;  but  in  many  cases  association 
means  exaltation.  Emerson  says,  that  in  society  "  the 
virtue  in  most  request  is  conformity ; "  but  by  resisting 
foolish  conformity  independence  is  developed.  Tauler 
said,  "I  never  mingled  with  men  but  I  came  home 
less  of  a  man  than  I  went  out. "  All,  however,  are  not 
Taulers;  his  standard  was  that  of  a  mystic  and  ho 
naturally  favored  solitude ;  and  the  society  accessible 
may  not  have  been  of  the  best. 

The  o])jcction  that  with   socialization   individuality 


134     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

vanishes  is  overthrown  when  the  error  on  which  it 
rests  is  exposed.  The  large  sphere  of  individual  free- 
dom is  also  the  sphere  of  individuality.  To  rob  a  man 
of  this  freedom  by  society  would  make  society  the 
means  of  slavery.  The  perfection  of  society  is  enhanced 
by  social  forces  backed  by  individuality,  forces  which 
prevent  a  dead  monotony  by  promoting  diversity  in 
unity.  The  true  society,  which  distinguishes  between 
the  private  and  the  social  elements  in  the  personality, 
encourages  individuality. 

The  view  given  of  sociation  throws  important  light 
on  communism,  socialism,  and  all  forms  of  society.  If 
society  is  composed  of  individuals,  how  can  society 
absorb  the  individuals  ?  What  is  it,  then,  that  absorbs 
the  individuals  ?  There  is  nothing  but  individuals ; 
therefore  they  must  absorb  one  another.  The  neces- 
sary limit  of  communism  is  what  men  have  in  common. 

Our  explanation  of  society  also  interprets  another 
phenomenon  otherwise  unaccountable.  If  society  de- 
pends on  individuals  (instead  of  the  social  factors  of 
individuals),  how  docs  it  happen  that  often  persons  of 
superior  personal  excellence  and  unusual  development 
make  but  poor  society  ?  They  meet  rarely,  are  little 
communicative  when  they  do  meet,  further  no  great 
social  interest,  arc  perhaps  indifferent  even  to  their 
own  community  and  state.  The  answer  is  that  society 
is  not  literally  constituted  of  men,  but  only  of  their 
social  elements,  whose  exercise  maybe  sadly  neglected. 
The  excellent  men  under  consideration  have  been 
developed  individually,  but  not  socially;  each  is  im- 
prisoned in  his  particular  sphere  and  cannot  enter  that 
of  his  fellows.  Perhaps  abstract  scholarship  so  absorbs 
the  attention  that  the  social  organism  receives  none. 
Even   institutions    of   learning   may  aggregate   rather 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         135 

than  associate  the  professors.  Thus  personal  superior- 
ity does  not  involve  social  superiority.  What  men  are 
determines  their  individual  character ;  what  they  share 
determines  their  social  character.  The  sociation  of 
personal  forces  is  not  identical  with  the  association  of 
men. 

This  distinction  also  throws  light  on  history.  The 
sociation  of  an  era  is  not  an  absolute  test  of  the  char- 
acter of  that  era.  The  men  may  personally  be  of  a  high 
grade,  while  the  sociation  is  very  imperfect.  Thus  a 
generation  may  be  rich  in  biography  and  have  little 
history.  Another  generation  may  be  rich  in  history 
and  poor  in  biography.  A  thousand  strong  men  iso- 
lated receive  no  attention  in  history,  while  much  atten- 
tion may  be  given  to  a  thousand  men  less  strong,  but 
organized.  A  million  laborers  in  a  country  may  be 
passed  without  mention  by  the  historian;  organized, 
they  may  form  the  dominant  historic  current.  In  order 
to  compare  one  generation  with  another  we  must  inquire 
into  the  progress  made  by  sociation  in  them.  A  thou- 
sand separate  wires  may  be  invisible  at  a  short  distance, 
or  so  scattered  that  only  one  is  seen  at  a  time;  but 
wrought  into  a  single  coil,  it  is  distinctly  visible  and 
of  immense  power;  yet  each  wire  taken  by  itself  is  no 
stronger  than  before.  There  are  degrees  of  isolation 
and  sociation  in  different  ages,  and  they  are  important 
tests  of  the  ages  themselves.  There  is  an  age  of  Louis 
XIV.  because  sociation  in  general  was  so  imperfect; 
hence  by  a  single  name  that  age  is  characterized  in 
France.  Then  the  sociation  of  revolutionary  forces 
took  place,  and  the  French  Revolution  stands  not  for  a 
name,  but  for  the  volcanic  energies  of  an  infuriated 
people. 

The  view  given  of  sociation  shows  why  all  attempts 


136     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

to  apprehend  society  as  an  entity  or  a  discrete  object 
have  failed.  Society  is  not  an  organism  like  a  plant 
or  an  animal.  It  is  something  very  real,  but  not  an 
indissoluble  unit.  It  consists  of  forces  which  change 
constantly.  Individuals  come  and  go,  their  social 
energies  vary,  and  thus  society  itself  is  subject  to 
change.  Sometimes  the  social  mechanism  is  so  fixed 
that  there  is  a  certain  continuity  even  amid  great 
changes  of  individuals,  as  in  certain  churches,  states, 
and  institutions.  When  we  speak  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  we  mean  a  system  of  theoretical  and  practical 
energies  (doctrines,  institutions,  practices) ;  and  of  the 
millions  who  belong  to  that  church,  we  think  as  Catho- 
lic only  so  far  as  they  are  the  embodiment  of  these 
energies. 

Having  now  given  an  explanation  of  sociation  and 
its  relation  to  the  ordinary  sense  of  association,  it  will 
henceforth  be  understood  what  we  mean  when  we  use 
the  old  terms  and  speak  of  society  as  composed  of  indi- 
viduals. When  we  have  spoken  thus  in  preceding 
pages,  the  sense,  after  the  explanation  given,  cannot 
be  mistaken.  Let  association  be  used,  but  let  it  mean 
sociation.  The  beginner  may  find  it  diflficult  to  treat 
society  as  a  system  of  forces;  but  practice  will  over- 
come the  difficulty,  and  he  will  soon  wonder  how  he 
could  ever  imagine  that  society  consisted  of  indi- 
viduals as  totalities,  instead  of  the  social  energies  of 
individuals. 

Men  are  in  society  and  never  can  get  out  of  it.  Were  all  other 
bonds  severed,  invisible  ones  would  still  unite  them  to  the  family 
and  to  humanity.  But  when  we  say  that  men  are  in  society,  we 
usually  mean  that  they  are  in  social  groups,  affecting  them  and 
affected  by  them.  They  exert  power  and  feel  the  influence  of  the 
power  exerted  by  others.     But  social  power  is  not  limited  to  per- 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PEll   SE.         137 

SOD  ill  presence  iu  company.  The  solitary  student  may  solve  prob- 
lems and  work  out  systems  which  produce  social  transformations. 
The  great  uprising  of  Germany  for  freedom  during  the  Napoleonic 
wars  has  been  ascribed  to  the  moral  power  exerted  by  Kant. 
Thus  social  energies  work  when  their  authors  are  not  present  or 
are  ah-eady  dead. 

"VVe  now  know  what  is  meant  when  it  is  said  that  men  unite  or 
combine  or  associate.  They  have  a  purpose  in  view,  and  it  is  this 
purpose  in  each  one  which  is  united  to  the  same  purpose  in  the 
others.  The  essential  thing  is  what  in  each  individual  is  asso- 
ciated. I  may  have  an  associate  ui  business  with  whom  I  do  not 
associate  in  religion  and  politics.  Each  association  I  enter  in- 
volves certain  interests  and  purposes  and  energies;  other  interests 
and  purposes  and  energies  may  be  given  to  different  associations 
or  to  private  matters. 

The  Greek  word  for  community  Koivwvia  is  from  Koiwiw,  to  make 
common,  to  communicate,  to  impart  a  thing,  to  make  one  a  sharer 
of  something.  This  brings  out  the  idea  of  the  interaction  of  social 
energies  between  individuals  as  the  essential  thing  in  association. 

The  process  of  socialization  may  make  the  idea  of  society  more 
definite.  Certain  aggregating  forces  bring  people  together,  as 
natural  advantages  for  food  and  protection,  and  social  advantages 
in  a  city  compared  with  the  country.  Men  thus  aggregated  then 
associate  for  various  purposes,  exerting  different  social  energies  in 
different  associations,  forming  societies  for  protection,  for  indus- 
trial pursuits,  for  pleasure,  and  for  such  higher  ends  as  can  be 
promoted  better  by  union  than  in  isolation.  The  first  association 
that  rises  out  of  the  aggi-egation  may  be  general  and  vague,  only 
society  in  embryo.  By  the  process  of  socialization  the  social  inter- 
action can  be  developed  indefinitely,  forming  all  kinds  of  sociation 
of  various  degi-ees  and  intimacy.  The  character  of  the  society 
formed  depends,  in  every  instance,  on  wliat  personal  forces  be- 
come social,  and  the  intimacy  of  individuals  in  a  society  depends 
on  the  degree  in  which  things  are  held  in  common ;  hence  the 
family  is  the  society  of  gi-eatest  intimacy. 

We  can  easily  verify  these  statements  by  an  examination  of 
society.  As  a  tree  does  not  absorb  the  whole  soil,  but  only  so 
much  as  its  constitution  requires,  so  each  society  takes  from  its 
members  w^hat  its  character  requires.  Thus  individual  recreative, 
friendly,  economic,  religious  energies  become  co-operative  between 


138     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

different  persons  and  determine  the  nature  of  the  societies  formed. 
Tlie  test  of  societies  here  given  is  unmistakable  :  the  nature  of  the 
associative  forces  determines  the  character  of  the  societies. 

Every  society  likewise  testifies  that  the  intimacy  of  the  members 
depends  on  the  degree  in  which  social  objects  are  shared. 

Humanity  constitutes  a  society  only  in  the  most  general  sense. 
Whatever  makes  a  man  human  constitutes  him  a  member  of  the 
human  family,  and  only  this  human  element  is  considered. 

When  we  come  to  a  particular  race,  as  the  African,  we  find  the 
bonds  more  intimate,  because  more  is  shared.  Not  only  do  those 
of  this  race  have  in  common  all  that  makes  them  human,  but  like- 
wise all  that  makes  them  Africans. 

Still  more  intimate  are  the  bonds  when  members  of  the  same 
humanity  and  the  same  race  also  have  the  same  nationality.  All 
the  national  bonds  serve  to  make  them  one. 

The  bonds  of  humanity,  of  race,  and  of  nation  are  real,  but  do 
not  depend  on  our  consciousness  of  them ;  they  exist  whether  we 
recognize  them  or  not.  But  when  these  bonds  are  recognized  it  is 
evident  that  the  ties  of  race  and  nationality  unite  more  closely 
than  the  looser  ties  of  humanity. 

The  closest  ties  are  those  of  the  family,  because  in  the  family 
more  is  shared  than  in  other  associations.  Here,  as  in  every  other 
aspect,  we  thus  see  that  in  each  case  it  is  what  men  share  that 
unites  them  and  constitutes  the  association  ;  and  that  the  perfec- 
tion of  a  society  consists  in  the  nature  of  what  men  share  and  in 
the  degTee  in  which  they  share  it. 

We  must  distinguish  between  what  men  really  have  in  common 
and  what  they  recognize  in  one  another  as  common.  Not  what 
men  have  in  common  is  the  attractive  power  to  draw  them  to- 
gether ;  not  even  what  they  recognize  as  held  in  common  is  such 
a  power.  That  which  attracts  men  to  one  another  consists  of 
qualities  they  desire  and  seek.  If  another  has  only  what  I  have, 
I  may  not  need  or  want  him  ;  but  if  he  has  what  I  lack  and  seek, 
the  strongest  attraction  may  exist.  It  is  like  the  attraction  of 
negative  and  positive  magnetic  poles.  Men  may  be  too  alilvc  for 
intimacy;  what  they  have  in  common  does  not  coalesce.  The 
bonds  of  union  are  formed  by  what  is  consciously  needed  and 
appreciated,  and  whose  growth  can  be  promoted  by  co-operation. 
Societies  are  formed  when  what  men  have  in  common  interacts, 
attracts,  coalesces. 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER   SE.         139 

A  very  definite  idea  of  society  is  thus  given.  Sociation  consists 
of  the  ties  which  unite  men,  of  the  interaction  of  personal  forces 
in  different  individuals.  Twenty  men  anxious  for  civil  reform 
combine  for  tha,t  purpose.  This  purpose  is  the  bond  of  union,  the 
one  factor  which  constitutes  the  association.  Each  man  may  have 
a  hundred  private  and  social  interests  which  are  not  absorbed  into 
that  organization. 

The  idea  of  sociation  is  so  emphasized  here  because  heretofore 
the  chief  difficulty  respecting  society  has  been  that  its  distinctive 
feature  was  not  set  in  bold  relief.  Sociology  itself  was  confused 
because  the  individual  himself  was  merged  in  society ;  what  he 
himself  is  was  not  distinguished  from  what  he  shares,  that  is,  the 
purely  individual  factor  in  him  has  not  been  distinguished  from 
the  social  factor.  In  social  analysis  we  have  stopped  with  the  in- 
dividual, whereas  the  social  element  in  him  is  the  ultimate  object 
of  the  analysis. 

Political  economy  is  one  of  the  social  sciences.  It  exists  for 
men,  and  men  are  always  the  producers,  possessors,  and  consumers 
of  the  wealth  which  is  the  object  of  economics.  Why  is  it  that  in 
political  economy  we  think  of  the  laws  of  production,  distribution, 
exchange,  and  consumption,  without  always  thinking  of  men  as 
the  ones  whom  these  laws  concern  ?  We  consider  the  economic 
forces  by  themselves  so  readily  because  the  science  of  economics  is 
so  fully  developed ;  its  laws  of  production  have  been  made  to 
stand  out  by  themselves,  so  that  we  can  contemplate  them  without 
continually  considering  the  persons  who  are  the  producers. 

That  we  cannot  so  readily  abstract  all  the  social  forces  from 
the  individuals  is  due  to  the  fact  that  Sociology  is  comparatively 
new  ;  attention  has  been  concentrated  on  the  members  of  society, 
rather  than  on  the  laws  of  the  social  forces.  Let  Sociology  have 
the  age  and  development  of  political  economy,  then  the  social 
forces  will  be  more  distinct  and  the  aggregation  of  individuals 
less  obtrusive.  Sociation  as  a  process  involves  a  development  of 
all  the  forces  which  constitute  society,  and  thus  stands  for  the 
development  of  society  itself.  In  large  outlines  we  can  indicate 
this  process. 

It  begins  in  the  most  elementary  manner,  just  as  is  the  case  in 
all  evolution.  The  personal  forces  of  different  individuals  inter- 
act and  thus  become  social  forces.  The  simplest  form  of  society  is 
constituted  by  that   primitive  interaction  of   forces  which  takes 


140     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

place  when  the  first  process  of  association  arises  from  mere  aggre- 
gation. Thus  some  thought  is  coinmunicated  and  responded  to, 
this  leads  to  other  thoughts,  emotions  are  aroused  and  inter- 
changed, plans  are  adopted,  social  action  results.  This  simple  be- 
ginning has  in  it  the  germs  for  all  kinds  of  sociative  development 
according  to  cii'cumstances  and  needs. 

Sociation  must  therefore  be  apprehended  as  living,  small  in  the 
beginning,  but  capable  of  endless  growth.  Thus  we  apprehend  it 
as  an  organism.  In  this  organism  (not  an  organism  of  persons,  but 
of  personal  energies)  are  concentrated  all  the  factors  and  forces 
wliich  constitute  sociation.  Sociology  deals  solely  with  this  socia- 
tion, its  origin,  its  development,  and  its  culmination. 

Taken  throughout  humanity  and  throughout  history,  sociation 
has  contents  so  vast  and  rich  that  detailed  description  is  out  of  the 
question.  But  certain  great  groups  can  be  formed  of  these  con- 
tents and  become  objects  of  special  inquiry.  Three  such  groups 
are  here  presented. 

1.  In  the  process  of  sociation  many  things  occur  which  leave  no 
evident  marks  behind.  It  is  not  meant  that  there  can  be  social 
action  which  produces  no  effect  whatever.  All  action  must  have 
some  results.  But  the  result  may  not  be  in  the  foi-m  of  distinct 
traces,  it  cannot  be  pointed  to  as  exerting  historical  influence. 

Most  social  action  is  evidently  of  this  kind.  However  effective 
it  may  be  in  exerting  an  influence  on  the  actor  and  on  others, 
nothing  of  it  remains  to  be  pointed  to  as  an  abiding  energy  in 
future  processes.  Thus  words  are  spoken,  schemes  are  discussed, 
plans  are  laid,  and  deeds  are  done,  which  are  like  drops  that  fall  in 
the  great  stream  of  human  liistory,  which  stream  they  help  to 
form,  but  in  which  they  remain  forever  indistinguishable.  How 
little  even  of  what  was  done  last  year  stands  distinctly  before  any 
mind  ?  Some  years  of  the  past  have  left  no  traces  whatever ; 
decades,  ages,  centuries,  with  all  their  multitudinous  activities,  are 
now  a  blank  to  us.  Yet  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  unrecorded 
and  untraceable  social  action  has  been  very  effective  in  the  evolu- 
tion of  society  and  tlie  making  of  history. 

2.  In  distinction  from  this  social  action  which  leaves  no  trace 
behind,  we  find  that  certain  deposits  are  made  which  remain  un- 
changeable. Perhaps  long  periods  have  wrought  for  their  ]>roduc- 
tion  and  they  are  the  culmination  of  extended  processes  of  thought 
and  effort.  They  remain  stationary  because  they  seem  finished; 
men  use  them  as  they  are,  Imt  do  not  attempt  to  alter  them. 


THE  PRLXCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         141 

111  this  class  certain  games  are  prominent,  as  chess,  checkers, 
cards,  ball.  There  may  in  some  be  slight  changes,  new  combina- 
tions, as  in  games  of  cards  and  ball ;  but  in  the  main  they  are 
stationary.  Proverbs,  all  thoughts  that  seem  settled,  certain  insti- 
tutions, as  monogamy,  and  all  severe  dogmatism  and  traditional- 
ism, belong  to  this  second  class.  They  are  survivals,  perhaps  of 
the  utmost  value,  petrifactions,  fossils.  Custom  has  something 
of  this  element.  A  large  part  of  life,  in  some  cases  more  than 
others,  is  attached  to  those  fixed  things.  China  is  the  classic  land 
for  illustrations ;  the  caste  system  of  India  and  other  lands  belongs 
to  this  kind  of  contents.  In  religious  systems  the  Bible  and  the 
Koran  are  such  culminations. 

3.  Distinct  from  the  social  forces  \Yhich  come  and  go  without 
leaving  a  trace,  and  from  those  which  form  changeless  deposits 
which  perdure  throughout  the  ages,  we  have  a  third  class  of  con- 
tents, such,  namely,  as  are  represented  in  continuous  processes  of 
development.  The  tendency  to  processes  of  organization  is  very 
marked  in  social  movement.  As  the  mind  generalizes  and  con- 
structs multitudes  of  phenomena  into  the  unity  of  a  system,  so  in 
the  progress  of  human  history  there  is  a  trend  to  unite  numerous 
social  factors  and  forces  into  a  gi'owing  organism.  This  is  the 
department  of  Sociology,  as  seen  above,  which  has  received  special 
attention. 

In  this  process  of  integi'ation  and  organization  we  place  the 
family,  which  is  a  growth.  It  has  in  many  resj)ects  become 
stationary,  certain  elements  being  regarded  as  fixed ;  still,  in  other 
respects  it  is  capable  of  development.  Here  also  belong  the  church, 
the  state,  and  numerous  other  organizations  and  institutions,  all  of 
them  with  fixed  but  also  with  variable  elements. 

In  language  we  have  a  good  type  of  this  organic  process.  Lan- 
guage is  a  body  whose  soul  is  thought.  It  is  a  growth  from  small 
beginnings,  as  roots,  now  mostly  buried  so  deep  in  the  past  as  to 
be  beyond  recovery,  developing  for  countless  ages  increments 
visible  and  invisible,  and  still  continuing  its  process  of  evolution. 
The  dead  languages  belong  to  the  second  class,  but  all  living  ones 
to  the  third.     Thus  a  language  appears  like  an  organism. 

Philosophy,  science,  literature,  are  similar,  though  the  organic 
connection  is  not  always  so  clearly  tracealile  in  them  as  in  the 
growth  of  language.  There  are  of  course  in  language,  and  in  all 
social  organisms,  fixed  as  well  as  growing  elements.    In  proportion 


142     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

as  any  iustitutiou  is  stationary  or  developing,  it  may  be  called 
static  or  dynamic. 

It  is  an  interesting  question  why  certain  social  forces  tend  to 
form  permanent  organizations,  while  others  do  not.  Is  it  due  to 
the  dominant  interest  involved,  which  organizes  certain  social 
forces,  as  love,  economics,  religion,  politics ;  or  is  there  something 
in  the  forces  themselves  which  leads  to  their  organization  ?  The 
play  element,  the  recreative  tendencies,  whatever  depends  chiefly 
on  spontaneity,  seem  too  subjective  to  form  organizations  as  readily 
as  what  is  more  objective,  as  economics,  politics,  and  charitable 
institutions.  Evidently  we  can  look  for  organization  only  where 
there  is  continuity  and  likewise  advantage  in  co-operation. 

The  idea  of  sociation  may  be  brought  out  more  distinctly  by 
considering  some  of  the  lower  forms  of  organisms.  Some  of  these 
forms  of  animal  life  hardly  present  more  individuation  than  is 
found  in  a  plant,  all  the  members  of  the  organism  being  so  united 
that  each  is  an  indivisible  part  of  the  totality,  all  growing  together 
and  depending  on  one  another,  similar  to  the  different  parts  of  a 
plant.  In  such  cases  we  can  speak  of  the  social  animal  organism 
as  absorbing  the  individuals;  they  literally  constitute  the  organ- 
ism. When  we  come  to  bees  and  ants,  there  is  close  organization ; 
bees  and  ants  are,  however,  not  merely  distinct  individuals,  but 
they  act  as  individuals,  so  that  they  can  be  separated  from  one 
community  and  put  into  another.  In  the  case  of  man  we  find 
that  the  individual  counts  least  in  some  primitive  societies,  being 
most  completely  absorbed  by  the  family  or  tribe.  Civilization  is 
largely  a  process  of  individualization.  The  social  personality 
grows,  but  likewise  the  individual  personality.  In  proportion  as 
individuality,  independence,  personal  interests  and  private  affairs 
are  developed,  the  individual  is  differentiated  from  society.  His 
social  force  may  be  greater  than  ever;  but  it  is  impossible  to  make 
him  merely  a  social  cell,  or  to  lose  him  in  the  totality.  Society 
itself  ceases  to  be  a  mere  mass  as  personalities  are  more  and  more 
differentiated.  A  man  is  more  than  merely  a  social  specimen  in 
proportion  as  he  has  individuality  and  distinct  personality. 

Some  pi'ocesses  of  evolution  have  been  referred  to  in  this 
chapter  for  the  purpose  of  making  more  clear  the  thought  expressed 
by  sociation.  This  in  a  measure  anticipates  tlie  next  chapter;  but 
tlicre  is  no  danger  of  confusion.  Wliafevcr  illustrates  the  actual 
nature  of  society  will  make  the  following  chapters  more  easy. 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         143 

REFLECTIONS. 

Define  Sociation.  Distinction  between  Sociation  and 
Association.  Society  an  Organism  of  Social  Forces  distin- 
guished from  an  Organism  of  Individuals.  Illustration  from 
Magnetism.  From  Physics.  Application  of  Sociation  to  In- 
dividualism and  Socialism.  Relation  of  the  Individual  to 
the  Social  Organism.  How  far  does  Social  Excellence  de- 
pend on  Individual  Excellence  ?  Is  the  Society  of  an  Age 
an  Exact  Test  of  the  Character  of  the  Age  ?  Sociation  as  a 
System.  Growth  from  Aggregation.  On  what  does  Social 
Intimacy  depend  ?  The  Relation  of  Individuation  to  Socia- 
tion. 

B.   The  Principles. 

Principles  are  beginnings,  foundations,  ultimate  con- 
ceptions. We  mean  by  the  principles  of  society  those 
essentials  which  constitute  society  and  are  the  final 
interpretation  of  social  phenomena.  Wherever  these 
essentials  are,  there  society  is;  where  one  of  them  is 
lacking,  society  cannot  be.  These  essentials  exist  in 
that  primitive  condition  when  society  first  appears,  they 
continue  through  all  stages  of  social  development,  and, 
if  society  ever  reached  ideal  perfection,  they  would  still 
be  its  characteristics,  just  as  in  the  beginning.  We 
want  whatever  is  essential  to  society  per  se,  the  sub- 
stance, that  perduring  element  which  is  the  test  of  all 
social  existence  in  humanity.  If,  for  instance,  an 
interaction  of  the  forces  of  different  individuals  con- 
stitutes society,  then  there  must  be  society  wherever 
such  an  interaction  is  found,  and  never  where  this 
interaction  does  not  take  place.  The  social  energies 
of  individuals  may  change,  the  kind  of  association  be 
altered,  and  the  whole  character  of  society  transformed ; 
but  there  will  continue  to  be  society  so  long  as  the 
forces  exerted  by  individuals  interact. 


144     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Our  first  division  therefore  discusses  the  structure  of 
society;  the  social  functions  are  involved  only  so  far  as 
directly  connected  with  the  structure.  Aiming  solely 
at  the  fundamental  anatomy  and  physiology  of  the  social 
organism,  we  do  not  consider  the  changes  wrought  in 
the  skeleton  and  the  muscles  by  means  of  climate, 
food,  and  exercise.  The  growth,  adaptations,  and  mod- 
ifications of  the  body  we  leave  to  the  second  division. 
We  weigh  what  is  essential  for  the  race;  we  do  not 
follow  the  races  as  they  unfold  their  peculiarities. 
Our  attention  is  concentrated  on  the  alphabet,  not  on 
the  vast  literature  which  is  produced  by  combining  its 
letters.  The  social  embryo  is  the  object  of  inves- 
tigation. 

The  ultimate  social  basis  which  we  seek  gives  society 
in  its  most  general  sense  and  most  abstract  form.  All 
it  contains  is  essential  for  the  social  structure.  The 
student  will  therefore  expect  no  account  of  any  particu- 
lar kind  of  society,  nor  of  that  concrete  fulness  which 
characterizes  the  actually  existing  societies.  Yet  this 
first  division  of  Sociology  is  not  barren;  it  seems  inex- 
haustible. It  involves  a  discussion  of  the  forces  which 
constitute  and  control  society,  and  which  are  the  sources 
of  the  social  phenomena.  The  individuals  who  possess 
the  forces  must  likewise  be  considered,  and  the  rela- 
tion of  these  forces  to  what  remains  unsocialized  in 
the  same  individuals.  The  social  energies  are  the  key 
to  the  interpretation  of  society;  that  which  attracts, 
repels,  unites,  divides  men  must  be  explained;  the 
method  according  to  which  the  social  foi-ccs  interact 
should  likewise  be  studied.  A  complete  knowledge  of 
the  social  energies  would  enable  us  to  understand  all 
actual  and  possible  social  ])henomena,  just  as  a  perfect 
knowledge  of  the  chemical  elements  would  enable  us  to 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         145 

understand  all  forms  produced  by  their  combination 
throughout  the  universe.  Indeed,  our  first  division 
deals  with  the  elements  of  society,  while  the  other 
divisions  treat  of  their  actual  combinations. 

The  clicmical  elements  can  be  fully  understood  only 
according  to  their  manifestations  and  combinations. 
So  it  may  be  claimed  that  the  fundamental  elements 
of  society  can  be  fully  known  only  as  they  work  in 
society.  To  this  supposition,  it  seems,  we  owe  the 
stress  on  social  phenomena  and  the  neglect  of  their 
ultimate  sources,  on  the  part  of  sociological  writers. 
But  do  we  wait  until  we  understand  their  perfect  work- 
ings before  we  consider  hydrogen,  oxygen,  nitrogen, 
and  the  other  elements  in  chemistry?  So  soon  as 
recognized  they  are  treated  as  elements ;  then  experi- 
ments are  made  with  them  in  order  to  learn  what 
combinations  they  can  enter  and  what  they  can  do. 
Perhaps  the  sixty  or  seventy  known  elements  are 
reducible  to  a  primitive  one.  But  we  do  not  refrain 
from  their  separate  use  until  this  reduction  is  accom- 
plished. In  Sociology  our  procedure  is  similar.  We 
take  the  elements  which  constitute  society  as  we  know 
them,  put  them  at  the  basis  of  social  phenomena,  and 
as  their  manifestations  add  new  knowledge  respecting 
their  nature  we  thankfully  accept  it. 

Since  the  individuals  which  are  the  possessors  of  the 
social  energies  are  not  abstractions,  but  living  beings, 
they  must  be  considered  as  such.  And  they  must  be 
apprehended  according  to  their  actuality,  namely,  in 
their  real  environment.  It  is  impossible  to  abstract 
man  from  nature  and  yet  conceive  him  as  he  really  is ; 
therefore  we  must  take  him  and  the  society  he  forms 
in  connection  with  the  earthly  conditions  in  which  he 
is  placed.     Neither  can  the  individual  be  viewed  as 

10 


146     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

abstracted  from  his  fellow-men.  We  must  consider 
men  in  society  as  modified  by  their  relations  to  one 
another  and  affected  by  their  earthly  environment. 
Not  as  empty  abstractions,  therefore,  do  we  regard  the 
social  essences,  but  we  seek  to  get  all  they  involve;  yet 
all  we  get  must  be  in  a  principiant  form,  as  an  ulti- 
mate associative  factor  and  force,  not  in  detail,  not  as 
historically  developed.  If  certain  elements  are  essen- 
tial to  society,  we  aim  to  learn  what  these  are ;  after 
we  discover  what  they  involve,  we  leave  to  the  other 
divisions  what  has  actually  been  evolved  from  them 
and  what  ought  to  be  evolved.  The  principles  of 
society  thus  include  all  those  powers  which,  in  the 
process  of  evolution,  unfold  the  various  social  types, 
constitute  states,  create  voluntary  organizations,  and 
develop  the  social  phenomena.  Society  per  se  is  thus 
viewed  as  that  potentiality  or  possibility  from  which 
the  social  actuality  emerges. 

Every  writer  on  Sociology  considers  principles  as 
the  most  essential  elements  in  the  social  system,  and 
cannot  do  otherwise.  They  are  the  essence  both  of 
static  and  of  dynamic  Sociology.  Thus  we  find  that 
even  those  who  do  not  adopt  it  justify  our  first  division. 

These  principles  are  to  bring  into  bold  relief  what  is 
characteristic  of  human  society.  The  chaos  regnant  in 
Sociology,  as  we  have  seen,  is  largely  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  peculiarities  of  man  have  not  been  distinctly 
marked.  We  seek  that  difference  which  gives  distinct- 
ness. Little  service  is  rendered  by  describing  a  Gothic 
cathedral  as  a  building ;  we  want  to  know  what  Jcind  of 
a  building  it  is.  So  long  as  all  the  features  of  human 
society  are  made  prominent,  except  those  which  make 
it  human,  we  cannot  expect  to  overcome  the  prevalent 
confusion.     Only  after  its  exact  nature  has  been  dis- 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         147 

covered  can  we  determine  the  relations  of  society.  It 
may  help  us  to  understand  the  ancient  Greeks  if  we 
consider  their  indebtedness  to  Egypt  and  to  Asiatic 
peoples ;  but  we  must  go  to  the  Greeks  themselves  to 
know  the  Greeks. 

Every  consideration  leads  us  to  emphasize  the  prin- 
ciples of  human  society  as  the  first  concern.  They  are 
so  to  mark  this  society  that  every  one  who  grasps 
these  principles  at  once  recognizes  it  wherever  found. 
When  I  deny  that  the  physical  processes  alone  explain 
chemistry,  I  do  not  reject  them  from  chemistry.  Just 
as  we  want  chemistry  as  distinct  from  physics,  so  we 
want  human  society  in  its  distinctness  as  given  by  its 
principles. 

Some  of  the  elements  involved  in  our  division  can 
now  be  indicated  briefly.  As  already  intimated,  if  we 
get  all  that  is  involved  in  the  principles  of  society,  we 
shall  have  those  elements  which  are  required  to  inter- 
pret all  the  social  phases  which  appear  in  the  processes 
of  history.  Thus  our  first  division  involves  the  essence 
of  sociation;  that  is,  what  it  is  in  individuals  which 
sociates  them.  These  sociative  forces  naturally  lead 
us  to  consider  human  nature,  the  character  of  the 
individuals  whose  forces  compose  society,  their  physi- 
cal being  and  their  mental  capacity.  Besides  this 
large  department  which  includes  the  whole  of  the  social 
personality,  we  have  also  external  nature,  on  which 
man  depends,  and  which  constitutes  his  perpetual  indi- 
vidual and  social  environment.  Studies  like  these 
deal  with  the  first  five  disciplines  in  Comte's  hierarchy 
of  the  sciences.  Then  all  that  pertains  to  the  associa- 
tion of  men  with  one  another  is  involved,  the  reasons 
for  association,  the  kinds  of  association  possible,  the 
means  of  association,  how  far  association  is  a  condition 


148     IXTRODUCTIOX  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

of  culture,  how  far  a  necessity  for  a  livelihood  and  for 
protection,  and  how  far  a  convenience  or  pleasure.  It 
will  be  seen  that  every  point  under  the  first  division 
is  intended  to  explain  the  essentials  of  society.  All 
this,  however,  is  only  preliminary,  something  like  the 
axioms  in  geometry.  The  above  shows  that  in  human 
society  we  have  a  union  of  human  and  natural  elements, 
and  this  affords  a  basis  for  the  physical,  mental,  moral, 
and  religious  factors  in  association. 

Now  let  us  glance  at  the  society  whose  general  inter- 
pretation this  first  division  seeks.  Is  it  an  entity,  like 
a  human  being  ?  Is  it  an  organism  ?  Certainly  not  of 
individuals.  But  even  if  we  define  society  as  a  union 
of  interacting  social  energies,  it  is  not  an  organism  in 
the  literal  sense  in  which  an  individual  is  an  organism. 
We  speak  of  a  Zeitgeist  or  Volksgeist ;  but  can  there 
literally  be  a  national  mind?  Can  individual  minds 
coalesce  and  in  any  rational  sense  form  a  collective 
mind  ?  The  social  forces  exist  in  concrete  individuals, 
and  pass  over  to  other  individuals.  Hence  we  must 
consider  individuals  in  certain  relations,  exerting  influ- 
ences on  one  another.  Mr.  Spencer  says  that  "  the  pro- 
perties of  the  units  determine  the  properties  of  the 
aggregate. "  ^  This  should  bo  changed  to  read  that  the 
interaction  of  the  social  properties  of  the  units  deter- 
mines the  aggregate.  We  know  that  by  sharing  certain 
elements  and  exerting  certain  powers  the  individual 
organisms  become  the  means  of  forming  the  social 
organism.  "The  characteristic  of  organic  development 
is  found  in  the  progressive  subordination  of  the  part  to 
the  whole  and  the  progressive  differentiation  of  the 
parts  into  organs.  "^  What  principles  promote  or  limit 
this  subordination  and  differentiation? 

1  Study  of  Soci()lof^\%  52. 

2  "  Social  Peace,"  Schulze-Gavernitz,  289. 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         149 

This  will  give  some  idea  of  the  vastness  and  impor- 
tance of  our  first  division.  It  deals,  in  a  principiant 
form,  with  what  is  fundamental  for  the  whole  science 
of  society.  In  an  age  when  men  live  in  the  concrete 
and  make  their  investigations  almost  exclusively  empir- 
ical, many  find  it  extremely  difficult  to  grasp  com- 
prehensive principles  which  contain  in  epitome  the 
whole  subject.  But  for  clearness  these  principles  are 
indispensable. 

Some  may  be  tempted  to  regard  these  principles  as 
the  only  business  of  Sociology.  The  human  mind,  how- 
ever, is  not  content  with  abstractions  and  theories; 
these  are  apt  to  interest  it  only  for  the  sake  of  the 
reality  which  they  interpret  and  to  which  they  lead. 
Besides  these  principles,  explaining  the  idea  of  society, 
we  want  to  see  their  application  in  real  life ;  that  is, 
we  want  to  learn  what  society  is  historically,  and  what 
it  ought  to  be.  By  no  a  priori  process  can  we  evolve 
from  these  principles  the  social  actuality ;  past  failures 
serve  as  a  warning  against  attempting  to  construct  his- 
tory according  to  a  preconceived  theory  of  human  nature 
and  of  human  development.  Whatever  truth  there 
may  be  in  general  conceptions  on  the  subject,  we  can 
learn  the  actual  evolution  of  society  only  from  a  study 
of  that  evolution.  As  we  go  to  history  for  our  know- 
ledge of  the  historic  processes,  so  we  go  to  society  as  it 
is  and  has  been  for  a  knowledge  of  the  application  of 
the  principles  to  the  social  reality.  The  principles 
are,  therefore,  but  the  basis  for  the  further  development 
of  Sociology. 

In  a  former  age  our  first  division  might  have  been 
more  readily  than  at  present  designated  as  that  part 
which  deals  with  the  social  affinities.  Rightly  under- 
stood this  gives  the  true  conception.     Social    affinity 


150     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

must  not,  however,  be  conceived  as  an  abstract  innate 
human  quality,  but  as  solicited  and  developed  by  cir- 
cumstances, by  sociation,  by  culture,  and  by  the  influ- 
ences exerted  on  the  individual.  With  the  elements  of 
social  affinity  the  repulsive  forces  must  likewise  be  con- 
sidered. The  basis  for  the  affinities  and  for  repulsion 
of  course  lies  in  human  nature ;  but  this  nature  must 
be  studied  according  to  all  the  influences  to  which  it 
is  subject. 

The  principles  of  society,  that  which  society  in  every  form  always 
involves,  —  by  getting  these  primitive  elements  of  society  we  not 
only  discover  what  it  must  be,  but  likewise  its  possibilities.  Owing 
to  the  abstractions  it  involves,  the  student  will  find  this  the  most 
difficult  division ;  as  it,  however,  gives  the  essence  of  the  subject, 
it  is  worthy  of  the  effort  it  requires. 

Individual  elements  and  forces  associated  and  interacting,  the 
central  thought.  AVhat  are  these  individuals  ?  Not  as  abstractions, 
but  as  realities,  must  they  be  taken.  They  always  have  an  envii-on- 
ment,  and  they  must  be  considered  with  the  environment,  modify- 
ing it  and  modified  by  it.  Man  and  his  conditions  are  thus  placed 
before  us.  Sociology,  as  we  have  seen,  cannot  be  expected  to  evolve 
all  the  natural  and  human  sciences  involved  in  man  and  his  sur- 
roundings ;  it  depends  on  the  sciences  that  have  been  developed, 
and  appropriates  their  results  as  needed.  A  vast  sphere  is  included 
in  the  very  presuppositions  of  Sociology.  The  next  step  is  what  is 
commonly  called  the  association  of  individuals.  Just  what  is  meant 
by  this  association  ?  What  kinds  and  degrees  of  association  are 
possil)le  ?  Then  the  causes  which  lead  to  association.  The  associ- 
ative elements  and  their  possibilities  furnish  fruitful  themes,  and 
they  are  not  yet  fully  developed.  After  the  idea  of  association  is 
grasped  we  want  to  get  what  it  implies.  Fundamental  questions 
arise  on  which  all  future  progress  depends. 

Numerous  social  discussions  of  the  day  involve  the  question  in 
what  sense  society  is  an  organism  and  the  individual  an  organ.  In 
part  the  question  has  already  been  considered.  Literally,  an 
organism  is  always  an  individual;  but  there  are  analogies  to  an 
organism  in  society.  Figuratively,  then,  we  speak  of  society  as 
an  orjianism  and  of  individuals  as  social  organs.      In   the  same 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER   SE.         151 

sense  we  speak  of  a  social  mind,  a  social  consciousness,  a  social 
conscience.  Literally  they  cannot  exist.  There  is  no  conscious- 
ness in  society  except  in  the  individuals  in  society.  When  Con- 
gress is  of  the  same  mind,  the  meaning  is  that  the  members  have 
come  to  an  agreement.  The  state  is  personified  and  caUed  an 
ethical,  political,  juridical,  or  executive  personality;  but  that  is 
only  a  personification.  State  action  may  be  a  unit  because  an 
absolute  monarch  acts  ;  or  it  may  be  a  unit  because  the  represen- 
tatives of  authority  act  as  one  man,  agreeing  and  co-operating 
respecting  a  particular  policy. 

While  the  collective  mind  in  the  literal  sense  is  a  myth,  many 
objects  are  embodied  in  the  consensus  of  the  collectivity.  Public 
thought,  feeling,  interest,  and  movement  are  involved  in  the  state, 
in  institutions,  in  language,  and  in  literature. 

Even,  however,  by  taking  figuratively  such  expressions  as  the 
social  (or  public)  mind,  the  social  consciousness,  and  the  social 
conscience,  they  have  an  important  meaning.  In  our  study  of 
association  we  aim  to  discover  the  associative  factors.  We  can 
call  the  common  or  social  elements  the  mind  of  the  association. 

Thus  the  problem  of  a  society  becomes  essentially  that  of  its 
psychology,  though  the  mind  must  not  be  severed  from  its  bodily 
or  natural  environment.  The  following  are  fundamental  questions 
in  the  study  of  every  society ;  What  is  the  character  of  its  mind  ? 
AVhat  are  the  contents  of  the  mind  ?  Whence  were  the  contents 
of  the  mind  derived  ?    How  are  they  developed  ? 

The  mind  of  an  association  is  in  organic  connection  with  the 
minds  of  other  associations.  Therefore  just  as  an  individual  mind 
can  be  understood  only  when  taken  in  its  relation  to  other  minds 
with  which  it  is  connected,  so  the  mind  of  an  association  can  be 
understood  only  as  connected  with  the  minds  of  other  associations. 
Thus  the  associations  of  a  state,  of  a  nation,  and  of  the  world 
influence  one  another,  and  we  can  speak  of  a  psychology  of  each 
particular  association,  of  a  psychology  of  different  nations,  and  of 
a  psychology  of  society  as  including  associated  humanity. 

A  definite  object  of  inquiry  is  presented  by  the  mind  of  a  labor 
organization,  of  a  capitalistic  combination,  of  a  literary  society,  of 
a  church,  and  of  a  people.  Of  each  we  want  the  contents  and 
consciousness.  Mind  is  here  used  as  inclusive  of  aU  that  pertains 
to  the  idea,  the  sensibility,  the  purpose,  and  the  action  of  an  asso- 
ciation.     The  genesis  of  a  society  is  really  the  genesis  of  its  mind. 


152     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  conditions  of  this  genesis  are  found  in  the  character  of  the 
social  personalities,  in  the  natural  environment,  in  the  actual  needs 
and  interests,  and  in  the  means  within  reach  for  realizing  social 
ends.  The  different  conditions  which  prevail  explain  the  difference 
between  the  mind  of  a  savage  horde  and  that  of  a  social  group  in  a 
civilized  stage. 

So  important  is  the  social  mind  that  the  first  division  of  Soci- 
ology should  leave  no  doubt  as  to  its  meaning.  That  division  must 
likewise  explain  what  is  meant  by  the  social  organism  and  what 
the  relation  of  the  individual  to  the  organism  is.  What  of  the  in- 
dividual has  society  a  right  to  appropriate,  and  what  can  he  claim 
as  an  inalienable  right  of  his  personality?  Some  of  the  deepest 
problems  of  psychology  ai'e  involved.  The  dependence  of  the  in- 
dividual on  society  never  before  received  such  emphasis  ;  but  soci- 
ety cannot  even  exist  without  the  individixal.  In  proportion  as 
society  is  exalted,  the  individual  should  likewise  be  exalted.  Our 
analysis  has  established  that  the  social  energies  are  individual 
forces ;  therefore  to  emphasize  what  is  social  also  emphasizes  what 
is  individual.  The  individual  and  society  are  therefore  co-operative. 
In  some  measure  that  which  concerns  each  concerns  all.  Each 
works  for  all  and  all  for  each.  Of  the  fruit  each  produces,  it  can 
be  said :  — 

"It  forwards  the  General  Deed  of  Man, 

And  each  of  the  Many  helps  to  recruit 

The  life  of  the  race  by  a  general  plan, 

Each  living  his  own  to  boot." 

The  above  suffices  for  a  general  conception  of  the  fundamental 
character,  as  well  as  of  the  richness  and  importance,  of  this  division, 
though  we  are  well  aware  that  the  music  is  not  in  the  knowledge 
of  the  notes,  but  in  the  vsinging.  We  are  only  at  the  preliminary 
considerations  on  which  the  following  divisions  depend.  The  germ 
of  the  social  evolution  is  not  the  tree  in  its  concrete  development, 
but  the  source  of  all  it  becomes. 

We  place  stress  on  the  dualism  and  monism  involved  in  society. 
The  individual  and  yet  society,  that  is  the  problem.  They  are 
distinct,  but  not  independent ;  just  as  the  tree  is  distinct  from  the 
soil,  but  not  independent  of  it.  The  sacrifice  of  the  individuals 
means  the  annihilation  of  society.  If  individuals  are  the  indepen- 
dent monads  of  Leibnitz,  where  is  tlie  organism  ?  If  society  is  the 
substance  of  Spinoza,  where  is  the  individual  ?    How  can  the  trutli 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         153 

in  the  extremes  of  atomism  (individualism)  and  of  monism  (social 
organism  in  the  literal  sense,  communism)  be  adopted,  while  the 
errors  are  rejected  ? 

An  interesting  discussion  of  the  community  and  the  individual, 
from  the  Christian  but  also  philosophical  point  of  view,  is  contained 
under  the  head  of  Socialism  and  Individualism,  in  the  first  volume 
of  Martensen's  "  Christian  Ethics."  He  regards  Vinet  and  Kierke- 
gaard as  representatives  of  individualism.  Besides  pantheists,  who 
lose  the  individual  in  the  social  organism,  we  find  a  number  of 
modern  writers  who  fail  to  do  justice  to  the  individual.  Mulford, 
in  "The  Nation,"  speaks  of  the  nation  as  a  conscious  organism,  a 
moral  organism,  a  moral  personality,  and  uses  numerous  similar 
expressions.  One  need  but  reflect  on  seventy  million  persons  form- 
ing another  moral  person  in  order  to  see  that  the  expression  is  mis- 
leading, unless  taken  figuratively. 

For  clearness  the  student  will  find  it  advantageous  to  discrimin- 
ate between  society  itself  and  its  products.  Language,  literature, 
institutions,  are  social  products,  and  likewise  social  instruments  or 
agencies  ;  we  can,  however,  consider  them  by  themselves  and  shall 
find  it  profitable  to  do  so.  There  is  no  difiiculty  in  understanding 
social  progress  as  the  progress  of  the  social  individuals,  if  we  always 
take  these  individuals  in  connection  vdth  their  environment.  But 
can  we  not  also  speak  of  social  progress  aside  from  the  actual  prog- 
ress of  the  individual  members  of  society  ?  May  there  not  be 
progress  in  the  social  products,  such  as  language,  literature,  govern- 
ment, while  we  cannot  claim  that  the  individuals  have  progressed 
beyond  the  preceding  generation  ? 

The  close  relation  of  individual  to  social  progress  must  not  be 
taken  as  identical.  Individual  progress  means  social  progress  only 
so  far  as  the  individual  imparts  to  society  the  result  of  his  own 
development.  There  may  be  a  marked  difference  between  the 
social  potentiality  and  the  social  efficiency  of  individuals.  Like 
isolated  threads  are  the  individual  forces  which  can  become  social 
but  do  not ;  like  a  cloth  woven  from  the  isolated  threads  are  these 
same  forces  when  made  social  and  actually  interacting. 

In  order  that  the  student  may  be  able  to  grasp  the  idea  of 
society,  he  will  find  it  important  to  define  exactly  what  is  meant  by 
social.  What  is  individual  pertains  simply  to  the  indi\'idual,  as  a 
thought  or  feeling  or  possession  which  he  keeps  entirely  to  himself. 
When  he  keeps  from  society  what  ought  to  be  communicated  we 


154     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

pronounce  him  selfish,  egoistic.  It  is  in  contrast  with  what  is  indi- 
vidual that  the  meaning  of  social  is  made  evident.  Social  is  what 
is  communicated,  shared,  imparted  to  others  so  as  to  be  theirs  as 
well  as  mine.  The  thought,  the  feeling,  the  possession,  which  I 
share  with  others  is  social.  Thus  everything  which  a  number  of 
persons  have  in  common  is  social  ;  it  is  something  which  is  not 
confined  to  an  individual,  but  is  a  possession  of  society.  My  pri- 
vate opinion  is  individual ;  public  opinion  is  social ;  property  is 
private  so  far  as  wholly  subject  to  private  control ;  but  it  is  social 
so  far  as  society  has  claims  on  it  in  respect  to  taxes  or  otherwise. 
The  individual  himself  is  social  in  exact  proportion  to  his  relation 
to,  and  influence  in,  society.  Thus  the  same  object  may  be  indi- 
vidual (so  far  as  purely  a  personal  concern)  and  social  (so  far  as 
shared  by  society). 

But  why  share  anything  with  others?  The  complete  answer 
would  give  the  reason  for  the  existence  of  society.  This  reason 
constitutes  a  prominent  part  of  our  first  division. 

A  convenient  and  fruitful  discussion  of  what  is  involved  in 
human  association  may  be  pursued  under  the  head  of  the  following 
classification :  — 

1.  Natural  Conditions  which  make  Society  possible. 

2.  Social  Aims. 

3.  Social  Media. 

4.  Personal  Social  Forces. 

5.  Social  Products. 

Each  of  these  is  so  rich  as  to  be  worthy  of  separate  and  elabo- 
rate treatment. 

The  first  head  includes  those  natural  conditions  of  soil  and  cli- 
mate which  make  it  possible  for  society  to  live.  It  is  the  natural 
presuppositions  of  society  which  ai'e  here  involved.  There  are 
certain  aggregating  forces  which  bring  men  together,  and  thus  the 
condition  for  association  is  given. 

The  social  aims,  the  second  head,  refer  to  all  the  conscious 
purposes  of  men  in  associating.  The  aims  exist  in  individuals  and 
may  vary  greatly ;  only  so  far  as  common  to  a  social  group  can 
these  aims  be  said  to  belong  to  society.  We  must  distinguish 
between  the  social  aim  of  the  individual  and  that  of  society.  An 
individual  may  make  selfish  ends  his  motive  for  joining  a  society 
whose  aim  is  altruistic. 

It  is  in  considering  the  social  aims  that  the  distinctive  features 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         155 

of  society  appear.  In  nature  we  have  causes  which  work  with  the 
absolute  necessity  of  fate,  involving  inevitably  the  effects  that  are 
produced.  But  in  human  society  an  object  can  be  chosen,  remote, 
future,  and  its  attainment  made  the  specific  aim.  Thus  the  force 
is  not  behind  a  man  (cause)  pushing  him  resistlessly  onward,  but 
it  is  before  him,  drawing  him  toward  it,  fi:xed  and  chosen  by  him- 
self. This  teleological  movement,  this  rational  design,  is  wholly 
distinct  from  blind  impulse  or  dark  instinct  or  any  other  force  to 
which  a  man  is  irresistibly  subject.  The  aim  is  his  own  and  is 
subject  to  him. 

But  society  is  not  merely  marked  by  the  fact  that  it  moves  teleo- 
logically,  but  also  by  the  character  of  its  aims.  The  man  puts 
himself  into  his  purposes,  and  in  the  aims  he  pursues  he  reveals 
all  that  distinguishes  him  from  his  environment.  Social  design 
does  not  deny  the  mechanical  necessity  to  which  all  life  is  subject ; 
but  it  uses  nature's  mechanism  rationally,  for  the  accomplishment 
of  the  chosen  end. 

Social  aims  differ  with  the  advance  of  society,  and  these  aims 
are  among  the  best  tests  of  society.  An  individual  may  have  an 
aim  far  superior  to  that  of  his  environment ;  by  making  it  social, 
society  itself  will  be  exalted. 

Under  the  third  head,  social  media,  we  include  all  the  means  of 
social  communication,  such  as  look,  gesture,  conduct,  language, 
literature,  art,  not  considered  according  to  what  they  are  in  them- 
selves, but  as  social  agencies. 

The  fourth  head  includes  the  various  forces  which  influence 
society.  Laying  aside  natural  causation  so  far  as  it  affects  society, 
we  deal  with  the  forces  of  the  human  mind  revealed  in  psychology. 
Thus  we  have  human  needs,  human  passions,  and  human  desires ; 
all  are  to  be  considered  as  forces  so  far  as  they  lead  to  association. 
The  conditions  of  association  may  be  given  by  nature;  but  the 
reasons  for  association  are  in  men  themselves.  These  reasons  need 
not  always  be  conscious,  and  often  are  not ;  nevertheless  they  have 
their  basis  and  source  in  human  nature.  The  personal  social  forces 
are  of  course  in  individuals ;  but  they  are  only  such  forces  of  indi- 
viduals as  are  exerted  on  forces  in  other  individuals. 

Under  the  last  head  the  results  of  social  action  are  considered. 
That  society  is  a  reality,  not  a  vague  notion,  an  empty  relation,  or 
a  fruitless  abstraction,  becomes  clear  so  soon  as  we  inquire  into  the 
products  of  this  action. 


156     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

These  products  can  be  put  under  three  heads  :  — 

First,  the  effects  of  social  action  on  the  individual  in  society. 
He  is  not  the  same  after  he  exerts  a  social  influence  that  he  was 
before  ;  effort  and  exercise  have  changed  him.  The  swinging  of 
an  axe  in  the  air  cuts  no  wood,  but  it  develops  muscle.  Then,  the 
society  in  which  he  moves  also  exerts  an  influence  on  him. 

Second,  social  action  affects  society  itself  as  well  as  individuals. 
The  thoughts,  the  feelings,  the  motives  communicated  by  indi- 
viduals become  a  common  possession  ;  what  one  has,  all  share, 
and  thus  all  are  benefited.  .  It  is  this  common  property  which 
constitutes  the  social  possession ;  and  as  this  is  increased,  society 
itself  advances.  There  is  actual  social  growth ;  first  a  few  social 
forces,  then  many ;  their  action  at  first  simple,  then  complex ;  edu- 
cation advances,  and  all  shai'e  in  the  depth,  breadth,  and  richness 
of  thought ;  the  forms  of  communication  become  more  varied  and 
more  polished  ;  the  kinds  of  organization  are  increased,  and  higher 
degrees  of  development  are  attained  in  them,  revealing  all  the 
differences  between  the  endless  social  variety  of  modern  civiliza- 
tion and  primitive  monotony.  This  actual  social  growth  or  evo- 
lution of  the  social  organism  is  seen  in  every  department  of  so- 
ciety, in  the  family,  in  the  friendly  and  recreative  social  groups, 
in  the  industrial,  literary,  and  aasthetic  organizations,  in  the 
church  and  in  the  state.  Thus  the  energy  which  constitutes 
society  is  like  the  electricity  which  at  first  plays  wildly  between 
the  clouds,  then  is  mastered  step  by  step,  until  the  present  use  of 
electricity  is  attained.  Society  as  an  actuality  is  beheld  especially 
in  the  evolution  of  the  social  organism  by  means  of  social  action. 
But  this  comes  mider  our  second  division. 

Third,  we  have  results  of  social  action  distinct  from  the  effect 
produced  on  individuals  and  on  the  social  organism.  While  the 
social  element  in  language,  literature,  and  art  is  unmistakable, 
still  they  have  a  kind  of  independent  and  abstract  existence. 
Words  may  exist  in  a  dictionary  which  are  not  used  in  society ;  so 
books  may  be  buried  in  libraries,  and  even  a  Raphael  may  be  lost 
for  ages.  The  treasures  which  Schliemann  uncovered  when  he 
excavated  the  ruins  of  the  seven  cities  which  rose  one  over  an- 
other, revealed  social  products  which  for  many  ages  had  not  been 
social  possessions.  There  are  thus  social  products  which  have  an 
abstract  existence  aside  from  society  itself. 

Considering  these  three  distinct  results  of  social  action,  we  can 


THE  PRINCIPLES   OF  SOCIETY  PER   SE.         157 

inquire  into  the  nature  and  degree  of  each  at  particular  times. 
Does  the  civilization  attained  mean  the  superiority  of  individuals? 
Or  the  superiority  of  society?  Or  the  superiority  of  language, 
literature,  art,  institutions,  things  which  are  produced  by  society 
and  yet  are  not  the  personal  essence  of  society  ? 

In  considering  the  principles  of  society  per  se  we  discover  the 
potential  forces  by  whose  interaction  these  various  social  products 
are  created. 

There  is  a  temptation  to  specify  some  particular  reason  or 
motive  for  association,  and  to  make  this  the  interpretation  of  so- 
ciety and  the  essential  theme  of  Sociology.  The  more  specific 
such  a  motive  is  the  more  likely  its  failure  to  account  for  society. 
The  reasons  for  association  must,  as  we  have  seen,  be  sought  in 
human  nature.  Wliile  the  individual  acts  as  a  unit  in  entering 
society,  a  variety  of  motives  may  impel  him,  sometimes  one  and 
then  another  being  dominant. 

Human  natm-e  being  the  ground  of  association,  the  particular 
associations  formed  depend  on  the  particular  character  of  the 
social  forces  in  the  individuals.  This  human  nature  is  not  to  be 
constructed  a  priori  or  determined  speculatively,  but  to  be  taken 
as  it  is.  We  say  little  when  we  affirm  that  men  associate  because 
adapted  to  one  another,  yet  that  statement  is  fundamental. 

Since  the  adaptation  of  individuals  to  one  another  furnishes  the 
basis  of  all  sociological  construction  and  development,  it  deserves 
more  attention  in  order  that  its  meaning  may  be  learned. 

We  mean  that  human  association  is  always  a  result  and  a  form 
of  human  adaptation  ;  that  we  must  look  to  this  adaptation  for 
the  explanation  of  all  kinds  and  degrees  of  association ;  and  that 
the  interpretation  of  this  adaptation  is  the  interpretation  of  society 
itself.  This  brings  before  us  a  fundamental  problem  of  Sociology: 
What  is  there  iu  individuals  which  so  adapts  them  to  one  another 
as  to  become  the  ground  of  association  ? 

The  consciousness  of  need  is  the  basis  of  human  action ;  the 
line  of  action  is  determined  by  the  hope  of  obtaining  the  supply 
needed.  A  feels  a  need  which  B  can  supply,  and  that  becomes  the 
ground  of  association.  Thus  all  the  needs  of  human  nature  for 
which  a  supply  can  be  found  by  companionship  with  others  are 
associative  impulses.  In  union  with  B,  A  can  better  secure  food 
than  when  alone ;  or  he  can  better  defend  himself  against  an 
enemy ;  or  he  can  gratify  his  passion  and  accomplish  his  desires ; 


158     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

he  finds  a  craving  of  his  nature  satisfied  by  companionship ;  he 
can  by  means  of  the  association  promote  education  and  all  the 
interests  of  culture.  In  the  most  general  terms,  we  may  say  that 
A  and  B  associate  because  by  means  of  this  association  pain  is 
relieved  and  pleasui'e  promoted  and  some  interest  subserved. 

If  now  we  could  determine  all  the  pleasures  that  can  be  en- 
hanced, and  all  pains  that  can  be  relieved,  and  all  interests  that 
can  be  subserved  by  association,  then  we  should  also  have  all  the 
motives  for  association.  Here  of  course  we  take  pleasure  and 
pain  and  interest  in  the  most  comprehensive  sense,  as  including 
everjiihmg  which  forms  a  ground  for  attraction.  By  this  study 
of  need  and  adaptation  we  find  such  motives  of  association  as  the 
following :  industrial  reasons  and  the  whole  realm  of  economics ; 
reasons  for  safety  against  foes,  military  association  and  the  state ; 
the  need  of  companionship,  the  vast  realm  of  love  and  friend- 
ship ;  the  need  of  recreation,  societies  for  pleasm'e  ;  the  cultiu'e  of 
the  higher  interests,  education,  literature,  art,  science,  philosophy, 
ethics,  and  religion.  Thus  in  every  instance  the  study  of  society 
refers  us  back  to  the  cause  of  association,  to  the  motive  lying  at 
its  basis,  and  to  the  adaptation  of  men  in  their  union  with  one 
another  to  satisfy  their  needs.  Here  is  the  test  for  all  society  of 
the  past  and  the  present,  here  the  condition  for  all  society  of  the 
future.^ 

It  is  thus  clear  that  it  is  not  as  an  abstraction  that  we  consider 
human  natm-e  or  the  adaptation  of  men  to  one  another.  This 
adaptation  must  be  learned  from  its  manifestations  in  society. 
The  association  of  A  and  B  depends  on  the  impression  each  re- 
ceives from  the  other.  Thus  their  imagined  adaptation  to  one 
another  may  take  the  place  of  the  real  adaptation.  Mistakes  in 
this  respect  are  common.  The  attraction  between  individuals 
must  not,  however,  always  be  thought  to  depend  on  full  conscious- 
ness. Many  are  attracted  and  repelled  without  being  able  to  tell 
why. 

A  and  B  are  variable  factors,  living  organisms  subject  to 
growth  and  decay.  With  themselves  their  adaptation  changes, 
likewise  their  association.  Thus  we  have  evolution  in  individuals, 
in  their  social  forces,  and  in  society,  resulting  in  differences  in 
the  kinds  and  degrees  of  association. 

In  thus  taking  the  totality  of  human  nature  into  account  in 

^  For  a  classification  of  the  iiiii)ulscs  which  lead  to  association  see  the  next 
chapter. 


THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIETY  PER  SE.         159 

order  to  determine  the  adaptability  of  men  to  one  another,  wo 
indicate  our  relation  to  the  sociologists  who  make  a  particular 
element  in  man  the  associative  factor.  No  motive  or  force  in  man 
can  be  understood  unless  taken  in  its  organic  connection  with  the 
entire  personality  of  which  it  forms  an  integi-al  part.  The  struggle 
for  existence  can  be  regarded  as  the  associative  element  only  if 
viewed  as  the  struggle  or  energy  of  the  personality  to  maintain,  to 
manifest,  and  to  unfold  itself.  Competition  is  a  common  social 
factor,  but  not  the  only  one.  There  is  imitation,  but  it  is  asso- 
ciated with  other  psychical  energies.  Powerful  influence  may  be 
exerted  on  an  individual  by  the  world  about  him,  but  there  may 
also  be  in  him  a  strong  inherent  force  which  is  the  determining 
factor  in  social  action.  That  the  mind  is  not  limited  to  sensation 
in  its  constructions  may  be  learned  from  geometry.  We  cannot 
draw  an  ideally  perfect  circle;  yet  all  our  reasoning  about  the 
circle  is  based  on  the  conception  of  an  absolutely  perfect  one. 

Not  what  men  need,  but  the  need  they  are  conscious  of,  feel, 
is  the  impulse  to  action.  Men  may  need  most  what  they  want 
least.  Since  this  consciousness  depends  on  experience  and  develop- 
ment, we  can  understand  why  it  varies  so  greatly  at  different  times 
in  the  same  man  even,  and  still  more  in  different  men.  Associa- 
tion is  determined  by  what  is  needed,  appreciated,  and  desired. 

"  The  consciousness  of  kind,"  emphasized  by  Professor  Giddings 
as  the  fundamental  principle  of  society,  is  indeed  a  power  of  asso- 
ciation, but  subordinate.  Certainly  it  is  not  ultimate.  The  con- 
sciousness of  kind  is  thus  defined :  "  A  state  of  consciousness  in 
which  any  being,  whether  low  or  high  in  the  scale  of  life,  recog- 
nizes another  conscious  being  as  of  like  kind  with  itself."  ^  Two 
pages  further  he  states  that  "  it  is  about  the  consciousness  of  kind, 
as  a  determinmg  principle,  that  all  other  motives  organize  them- 
selves in  the  evolution  of  social  choice,  social  volition,  or  social 
policy.  Therefore,  to  trace  the  operation  of  the  consciousness  of 
kind  through  all  its  social  manifestations  is  to  work  out  a  com- 
plete subjective  interpretation  of  society." 

The  fact  is  that  we  can  go  beyond  the  consciousness  of  kind 
and  deterinine  the  associative  power  in  it.  Men  of  the  same  kind 
associate  because  specially  adapted  to  meet  some  felt  need;  but 
if  others  not  of  the  same  kind  can  better  meet  the  need,  then  asso- 
ciation with  them  is  preferred.  A  man  may  forsake  his  father 
and  mother  and  kin,  and  cleave  unto  his  wife;  and  perhaps 
1  Principles  of  Sociology,  17. 


160     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

he  prefers  to  take  his  \^■ife  from  another  gens  or  even  another 
race.  The  wife,  not  another  man,  becomes  the  most  intimate 
associate.  One  may  have  so  much  of  his  own  kind  that  he  pre- 
fers others  who  are  different  from  himself  and  therefore  can 
better  supply  what  he  lacks.  Adaptation,  affection,  affinity,  inter- 
est are  the  determining  factors  in  association,  to  which  even  the 
consciousness  of  kind  is  subordinated.  The  consciousness  of  what 
kind  is  more  important.  When  a  man  knows  only  his  gens  or  tribe, 
and  regards  all  others  as  enemies,  we  can  understand  his  adherence 
to  his  own.  But  as  society  advances,  his  views  are  enlarged,  and 
others  may  become  more  attractive  than  his  tribe.  Hence  the 
breaking  up  of  families,  hence  emigration. 

This  theory  of  the  consciousness  of  kind  lacks  the  same  ulti- 
mate analysis  beheld  in  making  individuals  the  constituent  elements 
of  society,  instead  of  the  social  factors  in  individuals.  If  I  am 
particularly  attracted  to  those  of  my  kind,  it  is  because  they  pos- 
sess elements  peculiarly  congenial  to  me ;  if  they  lack  these,  and 
others  possess  them,  then  I  turn  to  the  others.  Englishmen  travel- 
ling on  the  Continent  sometimes  avoid  one  another;  nor  is  it 
unusual  for  immigrants  from  the  same  country  to  prefer  the 
companionship  of  foreigners  to  that  of  their  countrymen. 

Some  points  discussed  in  this  chapter  are  considered  in  "  Science 
of  Ethics,"  by  Leslie  Stephen,  90-131.  On  94  a  good  illustration 
is  given  of  the  perplexities  in  which  those  are  involved  who  make 
individuals  as  totalities,  instead  of  the  social  energies  of  individ- 
uals, the  constituent  factors  of  society. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Principles  :  Foundations  ;  the  First  Thought  in  explaining 
Effects  ;  the  Last  Thought  in  passing  from  Effect  to  Cause. 
Difficulty  in  apprehending  Principles.  Principles  of  Society 
the  Constituent  Elements  in  all  Society.  Importance  of  these 
Principles.  Their  Relation  to  Social  Evolution.  Define  So- 
ciety. An  Organism  in  v^hat  Sense.  Individuals  as  Organs. 
Aggregation,  Gregariousness,  Association.  How  far  does 
Human  Nature  determine  Association?  Reasons  for  Asso- 
ciation. Associative  Factors  in  the  Natural  Environment. 
Richness  of  the  First  Division.  Basis  for  Actual  Societies. 
Revie'wr  of  the  Chapter. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  161 


CHAPTER  YI. 

THE    HISTORICAL    EVOLUTION    OF   THE    PRIN- 
CIPLES   OF    SOCIETY. 

The  Problem.  Our  first  division  discusses  the  universal 
principles  of  society.  But  what  is  the  social  actuality  ? 
Our  attention  is  noiv  to  he  occupied  hy  the  real  interaction 
of  the  social  energies  and  the  historic  associations  pi^oduced 
thereby. 

We  go  to  history  for  the  purpose  of  getti^ig  social  evo- 
lution as  a  system.  What  takes  place  in  a  particular 
part  of  an  organism  may  he  a  type  of  the  process  in  the 
organism  as  a  totality/.  Thus  we  find  in  social  groups^ 
organizations^  and  states,  a  genesis  similar  to  that  in 
society  at  large.  The  sociological  point  of  vietv,  however, 
considers  each  pai't  of  society  in  its  relation  to  the  entire 
social  organism. 

The  prohlem  therefore  is :  how  to  obtain  those  large 
generalizations  which  are  involved  in  the  process  of  evo- 
lution. We  can  form  no  conception  of  the  countless  indi- 
viduals of  humanity  from  the  beginning  till  the  present ; 
nor  can  ive  imagine  any  possible  grouping  of  them  which 
will  present  the  social  organism  in  the  various  stages  of 
its  development.  But  the  kinds  of  social  energy  which 
constitute  society  are  comparatively  few,  they  can  easily 
be  classified,  and  their  operation  is  matiifest  throughout 
history.  It  is  the  laws  in  the  interaction  of  these  energies 
which  specially  engage  the  attention  of  the  sociologist. 

II 


162     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

We  investigate  groups, parties,  classes,  and  institutions, 
but  never  lose  sight  of  the  unity  which  they  form.  Social 
analysis  should  he  followed  by  synthesis.  We  study  the 
societies  which  are  evolved,  hut  we  hehold  in  them  the 
evolution  of  society  itself. 

The  planted  seeds  reproduce  a  thousandfold  their  own 
kind  and  also  develop  the  infinite  variety  beheld  in  the 
flora  of  the  world.  This  gives  some  general  features  in 
the  process  of  organic  evolution.  When  we  contem- 
plate Imman  development,  we  find  that  the  simple 
statement  of  the  unfolding  of  plants  from  their  seeds 
does  not  make  all  the  phases  of  the  evolution  clear. 
Society  not  being  literally  an  organism,  its  develop- 
ment cannot  be  fully  illustrated  by  a  natural  organic 
process.  The  course  taken  is,  however,  largely  from 
simplicity  to  complexity,  from  unity  to  multiplicity,  and 
from  sameness  to  diversity,  just  as  in  natural  organisms. 
In  the  beginning  of  society  we  look  for  little  variety  ; 
the  thoughts  and  interests  arc  few  and  elementary,  the 
social  forms  simple.  Nevertheless,  these  are  the  germs 
of  all  future  development. 

It  is  in  constant  contact  with  nature  that  humanity 
develops.  Through  the  interaction  of  these  two  factors, 
what  is  involved  is  evolved,  and  the  infolded  is  unfolded. 
It  is  not  a  creation,  but  a  growth,  a  rearrangement  of 
parts,  something  new  which  is  nevertheless  a  conserva- 
tion of  the  old. 

When  the  acorn  becomes  an  oak,  and  when  from 
one  oak  forests  grow,  we  have  a  process  similar  to  that  of 
the  mere  multiplication  of  human  individuals.  Some- 
thing more,  however,  takes  place  in  social  evolution. 
Each  tree  remains  distinct,  not  uniting  or  coalescing 
with  others.     In  the  human  family,  however,  while  each 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  163 

being  remains  an  individual,  he  has  energies  which 
coalesce  and  co-operate  with  those  of  others,  and  thus 
form  society. 

Social  differentiation  in  the  process  of  evolution  ex- 
presses an  important  truth ;  but  it  must  not  leave  the 
impression  that  society  itself  is  divided.  It  is  society 
that  is  evolved  ;  differentiation  means  that  society  itself 
is  unfolded,  it  is  its  unity  that  develops  in  richness. 
In  the  variety  developed  by  the  tree  we  have  nothing 
but  the  tree  itself ;  it  is  not  a  division  of  the  tree,  but  an 
expansion.  There  is  no  reason  why  in  the  process  of 
social  differentiation  there  should  not  also  be  a  process 
of  unification.  The  growth  in  diversity  may  at  the  same 
time  be  a  growth  in  unity.  The  ceaseless  wars  of  prim- 
itive society  may  terminate  in  social  unity  at  the  same 
time  that  the  greatest  diversity  is  developed. 

Three  distinct  processes  are  involved  in  social  evolu- 
tion. There  is  quantitative  multiplication,  a  numerical 
increase  of  individuals,  and  mere  additions  of  the  same 
kind  of  social  force.  Tliis  may  mean  great  advantages, 
just  as  a  thousand  dollars  enable  a  man  to  accomplish 
more  than  one  dollar.  The  quantitative  increase  gives 
society  more  power  to  subdue  nature  and  conquer  foes, 
and  it  is  the  condition  for  the  division  of  labor,  a  factor 
of  great  importance  in  development.  Those  who  devote 
themselves  to  a  particular  calling,  such  as  the  making  of 
arrows,  fish-hooks,  spears,  canoes,  ornaments,  garments, 
develop  special  efficiency.  In  this  way  quantitative  mul- 
tiplication promotes  qualitative  differentiation. 

Besides,  evolution  involves  the  development  of  the  same 
forces  to  a  higher  degree,  a  process  of  intensification  and 
growth.  Arrows  and  spears  are  improved,  garments 
made  better,  the  arts,  thoughts,  religions  perfected.  The 
movement  continues  along  the  same  line,  but  goes  higher 


16-1     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

and  higher.  By  this  process  new  varieties  may  be  pro- 
duced, as  new  thoughts  and  systems  are  evolved  from 
old  ones.  This  is  the  process  which  usually  takes  place 
when  a  tribe  or  community  is  left  to  itself  to  develop  its 
inherent  energies. 

The  third  process  in  evolution  consists  in  the  union  of 
factors  with  qualitative  differences,  as  when  men  or 
societies  with  different  views  or  different  degrees  of 
culture  combine.  The  different  elements  thus  brought 
together  are  assimilated,  and  the  result  is  unlike  either 
of  the  original  elements.  Thus  new  beginnings  are  made 
which  result  in  new  processes  of  evolution. 

It  is  to  this  third  process  that  the  greatest  differen- 
tiations in  the  development  of  society  are  due.  The  son 
differs  from  father  and  mother ;  the  children  have  both 
the  characteristics  of  the  father  and  the  mother,  or  rather 
a  union  of  both ;  thus  variations  constantly  occur  through 
heredity.  By  means  of  heredity  acquired  qualities  are 
transmitted  but  also  varied,  each  generation  being  the 
product  of  a  different  pair  from  that  of  the  preceding. 

Besides  the  differentiations  by  means  of  heredity,  we 
have  those  produced  by  natural  environment.  As  this 
changes  in  the  same  locality  or  as  men  move  from  place 
to  place,  society  itself  is  changed.^ 

In  some  respects  the  differentiation  produced  by  the 
contact  or  union  of  different  societies  is  still  greater,  as 
when  one  tribe  conquers  or  unites  with  another,  or  when 
peoples  of  different  degrees  of  civilization  coalesce,  as 
during  the  migration  of  barbarians  into  Europe.  The 
same  process  takes  place  in  our  day,  in  immigration,  as 
when  multitudes  from  different  nations  settle  in  the 
United  States.     There  is  then  a  commingling  of  different 

1  Spencer,  "  Principles  of  Sociology,"  vol.  i.,  p.  16,  Original  External 
Factors. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  165 

races  and  nationalities  and  languages  and  religions  and 
degrees  of  culture,  and  the  final  result  must  be  the  prod- 
uct of  the  interaction  of  all  the  energies  thus  united. 

In  this  way  new  types  ai-e  continually  formed  where 
evolution  is  vigorous,  and  each  new  type  becomes  the 
source  of  a  peculiar  process  of  development.  The  present 
social  condition  is  the  outcome  of  the  entire  evolution  of 
the  past.  Each  age  contains  the  deposits  of  the  past  in 
the  varied  forms  wrought  out  by  heredity,  by  environ- 
ment, by  the  union  of  different  individuals  and  societies, 
and  by  the  unfolding  of  the  types  which  are  the  products 
of  these  processes.  Some  elements  of  the  deposits  are 
permanent,  others  variable.  The  distinction  between 
the  permanent  and  the  changeable  elements  is  among 
the  most  important  discriminations  in  the  study  of  the 
evolutionary  forces. 

The  primitive  social  stage  must  have  contained  all 
that  is  essential  to  society.  It  could  hardly  have  had 
more  than  barely  the  essential  social  factors,  except 
that  it  was  not  society  in  the  abstract,  but  in  reality, 
in  a  concrete  form.  In  distinction  from  society  as  a 
mere  conception,  it  now  becomes  an  actuality.  Society  is 
born.  We  have  simple  beings,  uncultured,  very  near 
nature  and  in  subjection  to  it,  with  few  and  rude  wants, 
yet  all  human  development  potentially  involved  in  what 
these  beings  were  and  had.  The  social  forces  were 
few,  monotonous,  pertaining  chiefly  to  the  securing  of 
food,  the  overcoming  of  foes,  and  the  gratification  of  the 
passions.  The  beings  increased  in  number;  necessity, 
desire,  exercise  developed  and  multiplied  the  social 
forces ;  and  that  process  of  evolution  began  of  which 
the  world  to-day  reaps  the  fruit. 

Could  we  trace  the  social  energies  from  their  begin- 
ning through  all  their  processes  of  development  to  the 


166     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

present  time,  then  we  should  have  the  history  of  these 
forces.  Could  we  take  a  particular  social  force,  say  the 
economic,  and  give  the  laws  of  its  development,  then 
we  should  have  a  special  social  science.  If  we  could 
take  all  these  forces  from  the  beginning  and  trace  their 
interaction  with  one  another  throughout  history,  but 
confining  ourselves  to  principles  and  laws,  giving  simply 
a  comprehensive  system  of  the  actual  working  of  the 
social  forces,  then  we  should  have  social  evolution  as  a 
part  of  Sociology. 

This  shows  how  our  second  division  is  organically 
connected  with  the  first,  and  why  it  is  an  essential  factor 
in  sociological  inquiry.  The  first  division  is  abstract. 
It  shows  what  must  at  all  times  be  the  social  structure. 
But  we  want  to  get  society  in  its  actuality.  Hence 
sociologists  discuss  what  is  misnamed  descriptive  Sociol- 
ogy, and  give  an  account  of  the  family,  the  state,  and 
the  other  institutions  developed  in  the  process  of  social 
evolution.  By  making  a  special  division  inclusive  of 
the  essential  elements  of  the  evolution  of  society  we 
can  avoid  hap-hazard  discussion  and  give  unity  to  our 
investigation.  If  Sociology  did  not  include  the  historic 
development  and  actual  application  of  the  principles  of 
society,  it  would  be  necessary  to  create  a  new  discipline 
for  a  systematic  discussion  of  the  actual  associations 
formed  in  the  process  of  evolution. 

As  our  second  division  naturally  grows  from  the  first, 
so  it  is  an  application  of  the  principles  discovered  to 
the  social  actuality  and  its  history.  Were  social  phe- 
nomena our  ultimate  aim,  we  should  be  lost  in  distrac- 
tions. Facts  are  to  Sociology  what  plants  are  to  botany. 
Especially  in  this  second  division  is  it  important  ever 
to  remember  that  the  sociologist  wants  characteristics, 
types,  ideas,  which  contain  the  essences  extracted  from 


THE  HISTORICAL   EVOLUTION.  167 

facts,  laws  which  comprehend  great  series  of  phenom- 
ena, our  study  always  being  principiant,  intent  on  phi- 
losophy, science,  and  system.  We  look  for  a  seed 
whence  forests  spring,  avoiding  entanglement  in  a  maze 
of  roots  and  underbrush  and  trunks  and  limbs.  Yal- 
uable  service  is  rendered  by  history,  ethnology,  and  an- 
thropology ;  but  Sociology  has  a  different  point  of  view, 
and  merely  looks  to  them  for  material  from  which  social 
science  can  be  constructed. 

This  division,  including  the  entire  historic  evolution 
of  society,  involves  so  many  factors  and  is  so  compre- 
hensive as  to  be  bewildering  to  beginners.  Therefore 
subdivisions  are  necessary,  each  of  which  requires  pro- 
found study  and  extensive  research.  The  subdivisions 
adopted  should  include  the  entire  historic  unfolding  of 
society  in  a  logical  form,  giving  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  social  totality.  We  aim  at  the  discovery  of  the 
laws  in  language,  literature,  jurisprudence,  religion,  and 
the  various  social  institutions.  From  the  facts  of  a 
particular  stage  of  culture  we  pass  to  the  energies  which 
produced  them.  Investigators  in  different  fields  have 
done  valuable  preparatory  work  ;  but  the  student  will 
find  that  much  research  is  still  required  respecting  well- 
known  institutions  and  organizations  in  order  to  de- 
termine their  exact  character  and  place  in  the  social 
system.  We  want  a  philosophy  of  the  existing  associa- 
tions, but  also  of  those  of  the  past.  This  means  that 
we  seek  to  apprehend  society  in  the  societies  which  are 
its  manifestations. 

Wliile  the  entire  personality  is  unfolded  in  the  pro- 
cess of  evolution,  the  social  energies  are  largely  concen- 
trated in  the  will.  A  man's  social  life  is  shaped  by 
the  will  to  live  and  to  make  the  most  of  life.  This 
"  most  of  life "  depends  on  many  factors,  such  as  the 


168     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

degree  of  culture  attained,  the  taste  and  disposition, 
and  the  general  estimates  of  values.  Lotze  is  no  doubt 
right  in  claiming  that  we  are  less  concerned  in  what 
things  are  in  themselves  than  in  what  value  they  have 
for  us.  Values  are  the  attractions  in  social  life.  Here 
is  the  key  to  the  diversity  in  association.  One  chooses 
as  an  end  what  another  reduces  to  means  or  rejects 
as  unworthy.  It  is  the  difference  between  Alexander 
and  Diogenes  which  makes  their  worlds  different. 

The  aim  to  live  is  fundamental  and  the  most  univer- 
sal. There  must  be  life  in  order  that  the  values  of 
life  may  be  sought.  Food,  raiment,  shelter,  and  pro- 
tection are  consequently  objects  of  universal  pursuit, 
and  the  grounds  of  numerous  associations  in  all  stages 
of  civilization. 

Divergences  already  occur  in  the  method  of  pursuing 
these  objects,  and  give  rise  to  various  kinds  of  associa- 
tion. Consider  the  horde  that  lives  on  berries,  nuts,  and 
by  hunting,  or  that  makes  war  on  a  neighboring  tribe  to 
eat  human  flesli,  and  the  modern  methods  of  industry. 
Still  greater  divergences  appear  respecting  life's  aim 
after  a  livelihood  has  been  secured,  —  many  living  on  a 
low  plane,  while  a  few  cherish  exalted  motives.  These 
differentiations  increase  with  culture.  Compare  the 
monotony  of  life  among  the  savages  and  barbarians  of 
Australia,  Africa,  and  America  with  the  multiplicity  of 
interests  in  Paris,  Berlin,  London,  and  New  York. 
Each  interest  affects  the  social  trend,  and  when  signifi- 
cant or  specially  prized  it  may  become  the  nucleus  of 
organizations.  Amid  this  variety  of  interests  specializa- 
tion becomes  necessary. 

Human  needs  are  impulses  to  action ;  they  induce 
effort  and  result  in  evolution.  Some  of  these  needs  belong 
to  man  as  man,  and  cliaractcrize  him  in  the  highest  stage 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  169 

of  culture  as  well  as  in  his  primitive  state.  Other  needs 
are  the  products  of  culture. 

Can  we  make  these  needs  and  the  motives  which 
spring  from  them  the  basis  of  a  classification  of  the  pro- 
cesses of  social  evolution  ?  The  following  scheme  gives 
the  main  needs,  motives,  and  impulses  for  social  com- 
binations and  social  evolution.  This  classification  does 
not  attempt  to  give  the  order  in  which  the  motives  arose, 
nor  does  it  indicate  the  dominance  of  a  particular  one  at 
any  time.  The  motives  are  not  isolated  ;  they  are  co- 
operative, though  now  one  and  then  another  becomes 
dominant. 

1.  Economic^  all  that  pertains  to  a  livelihood. 

2.  Affectionalj  relating  to  the  family,  friendship,  love, 
sympathy. 

3.  Recreative,  the  play  element,  sport,  amusement, 
games. 

4.  Political,  regulative,  protective,  authoritative. 

5.  Esthetic,  iustinct  of  beauty,  art. 

6.  Moral,  ideas  of  right,  justice,  ethical  institutions. 

7.  Religious,  spirituality,  sentiment  for  divine  being. 

8.  Intellectual,  desire  for  knowledge,  culture,  truth. 
No  claim  to  completeness  is  made  for  this  list.     The 

egoistic  impulse  —  one  of  the  strongest  — ■  is  omitted.  It 
does  not  so  much  lead  to  a  particular  kind  of  social 
action  as  it  lies  at  the  basis  of  all  the  other  impulses  and 
controls  the  entire  personality.  In  social  life  its  effects 
are  powerful.  Associations  may  be  formed  or  entered 
for  egoistic  purposes.  The  impulse  leads  to  rivalry, 
competition,  envy,  hatred,  revenge,  ambition,  and  is 
manifest  in  the  higher  as  well  as  lower  walks  of 
life. 

Another  impulse  whose  action  is  general  rather  than 
specific  is  the  imitative.     It  is  universal  and  of  great 


170     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

influence.  The  fact  that  it  is  so  largely  unconscious  and 
beyond  the  control  of  the  actor  adds  to  its  power.  It  is 
closely  allied  to  reflexive  and  instinctive  action.  Good 
and  evil  are  imitated,  likewise  faiths  and  fashions.  By 
it  dogmatism  and  traditionalism  are  promoted.  It  ex- 
erts a  constant  and  silent  influence  in  all  the  relations 
of  life,  makes  thoughts  and  movements  contagious,  and 
produces  social  epidemics.  Nothing  succeeds  like  suc- 
cess. Public  opinion  is  mightier  than  reason.  Among 
the  most  powerful  factors  in  conventions  and  elections  is 
the  belief  that  a  cause  or  candidate  will  win.  Thus  men 
move  in  herds.  Some  give  the  key,  and  others  sing ; 
some  pipe,  and  others  dance.  Even  distortions  and 
mutilations  are  promoted  by  imitation.  Custom  be- 
comes omnipotent,  and  it  seems  as  if  almost  anything 
might  be  made  a  custom.  Even  in  what  is  most  subjec- 
tive—  such  as  religion  and  morals  —  imitation  exerts 
an  inestimable  influence.  Locke  said  that  "  we  are  all 
a  kind  of  chameleons,  taking  our  hue,  the  hue  of  our 
moral  character,  from  those  who  are  about  us."  ^ 

The  effort  to  find  a  sufficient  reason  in  conscious  indi- 
vidual and  social  activity  for  human  phenomena  must  in 
many  instances  prove  a  failure.^  Our  subconscious  ac- 
tivity is  probably  largely  under  our  control  through 
purposive  action  ;  but  we  cannot  become  aware  of  it 
otherwise  than  in  its  results.  Often  it  is  hardly  correct 
to  say  that  we  think,  and  feel,  and  act ;  it  would  be 
more  proper  to  say  that  something  thinks,  feels,  and 
acts  in  us.  All  persons,  not  merely  the  insane,  do  things 
of  which  they  know  not  the  motive  or  of  whose  motive 

^  Imitation  as  asocial  force  is  most  fully  developed  by  G.  Tarde,  "  Les 
lois  de  I'iinitatioii." 

'•^  Tliis  is  made  evident  by  vou  Hartiuaun  iu  "  Philosophy  of  the 
UiicoLscious." 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  171 

they  are  but  obscurely  conscious.  In  times  of  excite- 
ment when  passion  is  aroused,  in  powerful  popular 
movements,  in  elections,  crises,  tumults,  revolutions, 
wars,  men  arc  apt  to  be  moved  rather  than  to  move 
themselves.  This  blind  impulse,  this  unconscious  imita- 
tion, this  spontaneous  bursting  forth  of  latent  and  occult 
powers  in  human  nature,  must  be  reckoned  with  in  con- 
sidering the  forces  in  social  evolution. 

We  now  consider  briefly  the  eight  impulses  given 
above. 

Not  one  of  these  was  absent  at  any  time  from  human- 
ity so  far  as  known  to  us  ;  but  at  different  stages  of  evo- 
lution they  varied  greatly  in  degree  and  in  the  manner 
of  their  combination  and  interaction.  Ev^ery  one  has  led 
to  numerous  combinations  or  organizations.  The  first 
place  is  naturally  given  to  economics,  on  account  of  the 
prominent  part  it  has  played  in  society,  even  the  family 
being  dependent  on  it.  Under  the  head  of  the  affectional 
impulse  we  place  the  family,  love,  friendship,  sympathy, 
a  large  and  important  group  of  associations,  some  organ- 
ized, as  the  family,  others  less  formal,  more  spontaneous. 
The  recreative  element  receives  a  place  by  itself,  because 
really  important  and  apt  to  be  overlooked.  It  has  a 
function  from  primitive  to  cultured  man,  and  from  child- 
liood  to  old  age.  It  is  so  subjective,  spontaneous,  that  it 
has  not  led  so  generally  to  organization  as  some  of  the 
other  impulses,  being  in  this  respect  much  like  the  spon- 
taneity in  friendly  social  gatherings.  Games  of  various 
kinds  are  formed  among  barbarians.  Peoples  have  their 
national  games,  as  the  Greeks  the  Olympic ;  athletic  and 
other  sports  are  prominent  in  our  day,  and  healthful, 
elevating  recreation  for  the  masses  has  become  an  im- 
portant problem. 

The  need   of  political   organizations  is  evident ;  but 


172     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  impulse  leading  to  them  is  composite.  Defence 
against  foes,  internal  peace  and  prosperity,  love  of 
dominion,  are  among  the  strongest.  The  authoritative 
element  in  the  state  can  be  traced  back  to  the  family  and 
throughout  other  institutions  up  to  the  most  perfect  polit- 
ical organization  of  modern  times.  All  the  other  needs 
and  impulses  mentioned  are  individual  as  well  as  social ; 
but  it  is  the  peculiarity  of  political  institutions  that  they 
depend  wholly  on  society.  It  is  only  in  his  association 
with  others  that  the  individual  realizes  the  need  of  a 
state. 

The  aesthetic  factor  is  seen  in  the  rude  forms  of  the 
earliest  art,  in  the  brilliant  colors  and  numerous  decora- 
tions among  barbarians,  as  well  as  in  the  artistic  prod- 
ucts of  modern  times. 

The  moral,  religious,  and  intellectual  factors  dominate 
much  of  the  higher  culture,  but  are  not  altogether  lacking 
in  the  lowest  known  stages. 

Frequently  these  impulses  are  so  united  as  to  form 
strong  compound  impulses,  as  in  altruism  and  charity. 

To  trace  these  various  factors  and  the  societies  they 
have  formed  means  to  trace  the  social  evolution.  The 
question  is  not  merely  what  degree  of  development  each 
has  attained,  but  also  how  the  vai'ious  factors  were 
related.  Tn  the  state,  for  instance,  there  is  not  only 
room  for  all,  but  all  work  together. 

Connected  with  each  of  these  factors,  and  with  every 
association  formed  by  them,  is  the  question  of  progress,  — 
a  problem  of  depth,  of  importance,  of  great  difficulty,  and 
much  in  dispute.  All  progress  means  change,  but  all 
change  is  not  progress.  Change  involves  progress  only 
when  it  consists  of  advance.  Human  progress  is  variable. 
In  general  we  can  say  that  it  means  a  growing  realiza- 
tion of  life's  aim ;  such  a  development  of  the  powers  as 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  173 

enables  man  to  accomplish  the  higher  purposes  of  his 
being.  Great  advance  is  of  course  possible  in  the  in- 
dustries ;  but  this  is  to  be  prized  mainly  because  it 
enables  society  to  devote  itself  the  better  to  the  attain- 
ment of  the  higher  interests,  such  as  intellect,  morality, 
and  spirituality.  Only  in  proportion  as  these  are 
developed  and  made  supreme  can  we  regard  human 
movement  as  proceeding  toward  that  goal  the  approach 
toward  which  is  the  essence  of  progress. 

The  theory  once  prevalent  that  in  human  nature  itself 
there  is  an  impulse  to  progress  is  now  questioned.  Bar- 
barians are  so  contented  if  they  can  only  live  and  enjoy 
themselves  that  progress  seems  to  be  forced  on  them 
only  by  the  direst  necessity.  Even  among  peoples  in  a 
semi-civilized  stage  there  are  long  periods  of  apparent 
stagnation  or  even  of  retrogression.  Both  Africa  and 
Asia  furnish  abundant  proof.  Continuous  progress  in  a 
particular  people  or  in  humanity  can  hardly  be  predicated. 
Can  it,  for  instance,  be  claimed  that  from  the  time  of 
the  Greeks  till  the  present  there  has  anywhere  been  con- 
tinuous progress  in  art,  in  literature,  in  history,  and  in 
philosophy  ?  Where  can  we  to-day  find  a  people  equal 
to  the  Greeks  in  these  departments  ? 

There  may  be  progress  in  one  department  and  retro- 
gression in  others.  Now  religion,  then  philosophy,  then 
science,  then  art  receives  most  attention  and  exerts  the 
greatest  influence  on  social  life.  Sometimes  special  em- 
phasis is  placed  on  a  particular  phase  of  a  subject,  as  in 
our  day  there  has  been  in  the  department  of  art  a  marked 
development  of  music. 

One  difficulty  consists  in  the  number  of  elements  which 
enter  into  progress.  The  causes  are  so  complicated  that 
it  may  be  impossible  to  determine  the  exact  place  and 
influence  of  each. 


174     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

When  the  whole  period  of  social  evolution  is  con- 
sidered, it  is  evident  that  the  subject  can  be  grasped 
only  by  means  of  comprehensive  generalizations.  From 
society  per  se  we  pass  to  the  characteristics  of  the  great 
social  groups  which  have  been  subject  to  evolution.  The 
classilication  of  impulses  given  above  may  indicate  the 
lines  to  be  followed. 

In  social  evolution  Sociology  seeks  the  laws  of  society. 
The  difficulties  in  this  respect  are  great,  always  leaving 
the  attainment  far  behind  the  aim.  Often  the  investiga- 
tor cannot  determine  the  exact  limit  of  the  application 
of  a  law,  the  data  not  all  being  within  his  reach ;  then 
he  is  obliged  to  be  content  with  what  is  general,  cus- 
tomary, frequent,  or  applicable  to  a  particular  series  of 
phenomena. 

History  as  but  the  unfolding  of  an  idea,  a  manifesta- 
tion of  reason,  or  a  process  of  the  Absolute,  is  an  attrac- 
tive conception.  But  it  has  neither  been  justified  by 
Hegel  and  his  disciples,  nor  by  the  actual  historic  de- 
velopment. We  look  in  vain  to  history  for  a  logical 
order  of  development  even  in  historic  philosophical  sys- 
tems. Unquestionably  there  is  reason  in  history,  but 
not  as  developed  with  the  consistency  of  a  system  of 
logic.  There  is  reason,  not,  however,  the  ideal  reason, 
but  the  weak,  undeveloped,  variable  and  fallible  reason  of 
actual  men,  greatly  influenced,  frequently  dominated  and 
controlled,  by  interest  and  passion.  It  is  this  kind  of 
reason  which  runs  through  history  like  a  thread.  Not 
reason  or  any  psychical  factor  is  the  sole  causative  force 
at  any  time,  but  always  connected  with  other  factors. 

Not  a  single  or  simj^le  force,  then,  explains  the  evolu- 
tion of  society.  All  the  forces  of  all  men,  together  with 
those  of  the  natural  environment,  must  be  taken  into  the 
account. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  175 

We  must  again  refer  to  the  law  of  the  struggle  for 
existence  as  applied  to  human  development.  Whatever 
the  survival  of  the  fittest  may  explain,  it  cannot  explain 
everything.  Too  much  is  made  of  it  when  isolated  and 
treated  as  if  the  sole  factor  in  social  progress.  Exercise 
is  the  great  law  of  development,  whether  in  the  form  of 
competition  or  co-operation.  Indeed,  competition  is 
possible  in  society  only  if  co-operation  in  some  form 
exists. 

If  we  look  to  law  in  the  sense  of  a  causative  interpre- 
tation of  facts,  we  shall  likely  find  the  law  of  the  survi- 
val of  the  fittest  of  little  application  to  social  phenomena. 
The  law  itself  is  almost  tautological.  It  means  the  sur- 
vival of  those  who  have  the  conditions  to  survive,  a  state- 
ment so  self-evident  that  it  hardly  seems  necessary  to 
make  it.  The  very  thing  we  want  to  know,  what  the 
conditions  of  survival  are  in  society,  is  not  given.  These 
conditions  vary  with  society  itself.  It  is  not  the  physi- 
cally strong  who  are  always  preserved ;  they  may  go  to 
war  and  be  killed,  while  the  weak  remain  at  home  and 
live.  Social  conditions  may  be  such  that  those  physi- 
cally the  weakest  and  in  character  the  most  worthless 
survive,  while  the  strong  and  worthy  are  enslaved  and 
perish  prematurely. 

Whatever  the  value  of  the  law  in  biology,  its  applica- 
tion to  human  affairs  has  thus  far  been  of  little  service. 
What  does  it  avail  to  tell  us  that  individuals  and  societies 
which  can  survive  do  survive,  when  in  every  case  we  have 
to  find  out  by  some  other  method  what  the  conditions  of 
survival  are  ?  Owing  to  human  reason,  teleological 
action,  and  social  conditions,  even  the  effect  of  the 
natural  environment  may  be  minimized. 

In  order  to  make  investigations  into  the  social  actual- 
ity fruitful,  what  is  substantial,  not  merely  formal,  is  to 


176     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

be  sought.  The  substance  determines  the  form.  Hence 
our  emphasis  on  causes,  forces,  essences,  the  factors 
which  affect  tlie  solid  reality.  The  substances  with 
which  we  deal  are  the  social  energies.  What  arc  they  ? 
Under  what  natural,  personal,  and  social  conditions  do 
they  AYork  ?  IIow  are  they^  related  to  one  another  ? 
What  modifications  take  place  when  brought  into  co-op- 
eration or  antagonism  with  other  energies  ?  What  are 
the  social  results  of  the  co-operation  and  the  antagonism  ? 
Energy  is  always  the  reality  which  we  investigate.  How, 
for  instance,  is  the  economic  force  affected  by  the  aes- 
thetic, the  ethical,  and  the  religious  ? 

The  value  of  concentrating  the  attention  on  the  actual 
social  energies  is  evident  from  the  introduction  of  new 
forces.  Perhaps  no  conquest  over  nature  has  been 
greater  than  the  extraction  of  iron  from  the  ore.  That 
nameless  and  timeless  achievement  is  the  condition  for 
nearly  all  the  great  inventions  of  modern  times. 

The  incursion  of  the  barbarians  into  Europe  is  a  ques- 
tion of  the  forces  they  brought  and  modified.  Human- 
ism, the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  printing, 
gunpowder,  the  discovery  of  the  New  World,  political 
economy,  the  press,  popular  government,  the  arousing  of 
the  consciousness  of  laborers,  all  are  to  be  viewed  as 
forces. 

We  can  speak  of  a  unit  of  force.  The  individual  acts 
as  a  unit,  now  his  forces  being  concentrated  on  private, 
then  on  social,  affairs.  A  great  variety  of  forces  em- 
bodied in  a  social  group  may  act  as  a  unit,  according  to 
an  end  and  purpose  ;  as  in  the  case  of  a  political  party 
in  an  election.  This  unit  of  force  is  expressed  in  consti- 
tutions, programmes,  resolutions.  Sometimes  it  is  im- 
possible to  determine  all  the  interactions  of  the  various 
forces  in  a  local  social  group,  to  say  nothing  of  those  in- 


THE  HISTORICAL   EVOLUTION.  177 

volvcd  in  a  state  or  the  entire  human  family ;  but  we 
may  study  the  forces  as  a  unit,  the  purpose  and  direction 
of  them  as  a  totality,  as  when  we  speak  of  the  charac- 
teristics of  the  times,  or  of  the  trend  in  Russia,  England, 
and  the  United  States.  If  it  is  impossible  to  see  the  mas- 
sive base  and  icy  sides  and  rocky  crags  of  Mount  Blanc 
at  a  single  glance,  the  peak  in  which  the  mountain  cul- 
minates and  which  forms  its  most  conspicuous  feature 
may  be  beheld. 

With  this  great  sphere  of  inquiry  definitely  before  us, 
how  shall  we  enter  upon  the  investigation  of  social  evo- 
lution ?  We  can  proceed  chronologically,  the  beginning 
being  made  with  primitive  man,  and  passing  from  him  to 
our  own  time.  Prehistoric  man  must  be  studied  in  the 
meagre  remains  of  him  before  records  were  made  in 
writing.  Much  research  has  of  late  been  devoted  to  this 
subject,  resulting  in  interesting  and  valuable  material. 
From  the  savage  we  proceed  to  the  barbarian,  and  pass 
through  the  long  evolution  which  culminates  in  modern 
civilization.  We  can  hardly  expect  to  do  more  than  get 
the  characteristic  marks  of  the  various  stages,  showing 
how  man  changes  in  the  process  of  development,  and 
how  society  changes  with  him,  what  human  and  natural 
forces  are  dominant  as  successive  degrees  of  culture  are 
reached,  and  what  social  forms  prevail.  Even  by  limit- 
ing the  inquiry  to  what  is  general  and  principiant,  the 
results  are  exceedingly  rich.  It  is  a  social  panorama  of 
humanity  under  all  the  modifying  influences  of  soil  and 
climate,  of  heredity  and  culture,  which  is  thus  presented. 

This  investigation  of  society  according  to  its  progres- 
sive stages  of  culture  can  be  made  more  definite  by  con- 
necting with  it  the  study  of  particular  institutions. 
These  institutions  of  society  are  all  involved  in  the  de- 
grees of  culture  mentioned,  and  a  general  idea  of  them 

12 


178     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

is  essential  for  understanding  that  culture.  But  they 
can,  as  we  have  seen,  be  taken  separately  and  made  ob- 
jects of  special  inquiry.  In  institutions  which  are  types, 
centres  around  which  society  congregates  and  from 
which  its  influences  radiate,  the  ages  themselves  may 
be  studied.  Society,  in  a  measure,  is  concentrated  in 
them,  and  an  interpretation  of  them  is  an  interpreta- 
tion of  society.  Among  the  institutions  which  spring 
from  the  motives  classified  above,  and  whose  nature 
and  history  deserve  especial  study,  we  name,  first  of  all, 
the  family  in  its  narrower  sense,  and  then  in  its  most 
enlarged  sense  when  it  includes  the  descendants  from  a 
common  origin  for  many  generations.  The  state  is  an- 
other institution  whose  constitution,  origin,  and  history 
deserve  especial  study.  Religion  or  the  church  has  ex- 
erted an  influence  that  gives  it  great  prominence. 
Connected  with  these  are  language  and  literature  and 
art,  as  social  products.  In  all  these  cases  we  have  social 
forms  and  products  which  perdure  and  develop,  while 
the  generations  which  wrought  at  their  formation  pass 
away.  The  form  in  which  they  have  come  to  us  repre- 
sents the  combined  labor  of  the  entire  past ;  they  are 
the  embodiment  of  the  deposits  of  human  culture  from 
the  beginning  of  the  race. 

Each  of  the  institutions  involves  such  a  variety  as  to 
admit  of  numerous  subdivisions,  and  these  are  necessary 
for  the  most  successful  investigations.  One  need  but 
take  up  an  ecclesiastical  and  a  political  encyclopedia  or 
treatise  to  learn  what  a  multiplicity  is  involved  in  church 
and  state.  The  stages  of  culture  and  the  development 
of  institutions  can  also  be  studied  by  nations.  Thus  we 
can  inquire  into  their  character  among  the  nations  of 
remote  antiquity,  or  in  Greece  and  Rome,  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  in  modern  times.     We  can  also  investigate 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  179 

what  they  become  in  the  great  historic  systems,  as  in 
Judaism,  Christianity,  and  other  religions.  A  little 
reflection  reveals  to  the  student  of  history  what  a  vast 
realm  of  investigation  and  classification  for  the  under- 
standing of  social  evolution  lies  open  before  him. 

Another  method,  with  some  advantages  over  the  above, 
can  be  adopted.  Instead  of  beginning  with  the  past  and 
moving  toward  our  own  age,  we  can  begin  with  the 
observation  of  our  times  and  investigate  the  existing 
state  of  things.  Concentrating  the  study  on  our  age 
and  mastering  it,  we  make  its  interpretation  our  chief 
aim.  From  our  own  age  we  then  turn  to  the  past  and 
ask  for  the  social  forces  whose  historic  development  has 
culminated  in  our  times  and  created  our  society. 

The  student  can  easily  abstract  our  age  and  make  it 
an  object  of  thorough  inquiry.  The  fact  that  he  is  in 
the  age  and  part  of  it  offers  advantages  and  also  dis- 
advantages for  the  investigation ;  but  the  advantages 
predominate.  Even  by  thus  mentally  isolating  our  age 
for  its  more  profound  study,  we  cannot  afford  to  forget 
that  it  is  a  product  of  the  past  and  can  be  interpreted 
only  if  we  trace  its  genesis  in  history.  "We  want  to 
know  the  existing  social  products  on  account  of  our 
organic  relation  to  them  and  their  value  to  us  in  receiv- 
ing and  exerting  influence.  The  very  word  "  products  " 
refers  us  to  the  seeds  and  growths  of  the  past  as  causes. 
We  might  also  separate  the  past  social  development  and 
make  it  a  special  division,  thus  devoting  one  sub-division 
to  the  past  evolution  of  society,  and  another  to  the  social 
condition  of  the  present.  But  that  evolution  ought  to 
be  taken  as  an  unbroken  whole,  and  should  be  studied 
throughout  its  entire  process  and  in  its  culmination. 
We  want,  in  this  study,  to  learn  the  working  of  the 
essential  elements  of  society  in  the  marvellous  realism 


180     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

of  the  day ;  we  desire  to  know  the  exact  nature  of  our 
culture  and  of  our  institutions.  As  we  seize  the  present 
as  the  culmination  of  past  processes,  so  we  can  make 
the  culture  attained  the  standard  by  which  the  lower 
forms  are  measured.  But  we  are  by  no  means  wholly 
dependent  on  the  past  for  a  knowledge  of  the  lower 
stages  of  development.  In  America,  Africa,  and  Aus- 
tralia, we  can  study  Ijarbarian,  if  not  savage,  states  of 
society,  so  that  humanity  as  it  now  is  presents  a  correct 
picture  of  a  large  part  of  the  stages  through  which  the 
human  family  passed  in  its  processes  of  evolution.  But 
whether  we  go  from  the  past  to  the  present,  or  from  the 
study  of  our  own  age  to  its  evolution,  we  are  always  in- 
tent on  a  comprehensive  and  systematic  view  of  society. 

The  genesis  of  society  as  here  apjjrehended  is  thus  an 
integral  and  important  part  of  Sociology.  It  is  the  one 
to  which  sociologists  have  given  most  attention.  It 
deals  with  that  social  realism  which  constitutes  by  far 
the  larger  realm  of  sociological  inquiry.  In  this  social 
genesis  we  take  a  theoretical  interest,  and  study  it  for 
the  purpose  of  learning  what  processes  have  taken  place 
in  humanity  ;  we  likewise  take  a  practical  interest  in  it, 
because  a  knowledge  of  the  forces  at  work  in  society  will 
enable  us  the  better  to  use  and  influence  the  present. 

As  the  past  is  the  key  to  the  present,  so  both  are 
the  key  to  the  future.  Our  age  is  to  the  coming  one 
what  the  last  age  was  to  ours.  Evolution  is  a  continu- 
ous process,  and  our  division  includes  the  future  as  well 
as  the  past.  We  have  room  here  for  all  that  can  be 
known  of  coming  processes.  Comte  and  others  laid 
especial  emphasis  on  prevision  as  an  aim  in  Sociology ; 
but  to  treat  this  as  the  principal  object,  and  as  if  Soci- 
ology existed  for  its  sake,  is  a  mistake.  We  want  to 
master  society,  whether  or  not  prevision  is  the  result. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  181 

In  natural  science  we  sometimes  have  prevision,  as  in 
the  calculation  of  an  eclipse.  But  even  with  respect  to 
nature  foreknowledge  is  very  limited.  In  a  general  way 
we  may  foretell  the  seasons ;  but  how  little  can  be  fore- 
told definitely  is  proved  by  the  weather  predictions  in 
the  old  almanacs  and  at  present.  We  can  sow  seeds, 
but  cannot  determine  the  harvest.  Even  respecting  a 
single  individual,  propliecy  is  hazardous ;  certain  data 
are  not  within  our  reach ;  but  how  much  more  difScult 
when  numerous  individuals  are  involved,  all  of  them 
uncertain  quantities  ?  In  Sociology  the  factors  are  so 
indefinite,  so  varied  and  variable,  so  multifariously  com- 
bined, so  extremely  complicated,  that  prevision  on  a 
scientific  basis  is  at  present  out  of  the  question.  If 
certain  factors  meet  under  given  circumstances,  we  may 
have  some  idea  of  the  result.  But  will  they  meet  ? 
Even  if  they  do,  our  prediction  is  opinion  and  faith,  or 
a  guess,  rather  than  science.  There  may  be  progress  in 
this  respect,  just  as  in  case  of  meteorology.  But  can 
we  ever  hope  to  foretell  the  coming  of  a  Copernicus,  a 
Shakespeare,  a  Goethe  ?  The  unforeseen  advent  of  a 
Napoleon  may  upset  all  our  calculations.  According  to 
our  knowledge,  faith,  and  hope,  we  may  form  a  general 
notion  of  the  future  of  human  events,  but  that  is  all. 
The  character  of  the  notion  is  apt  to  depend  on  our 
optimism  or  pessimism.  Particulars  are  out  of  the 
question,  and  our  general  view,  even,  may  be  a  failure. 
Prophecies  are  usually  harmless ;  they  are  apt  to  be  for- 
gotten before  the  time  comes  to  which  they  refer,  and  the 
prophets  do  not  live  to  correct  their  own  predictions. 

This  of  course  does  not  mean  that  we  cannot  learn 
the  nature  and  working  of  the  social  forces.  But  we 
may  know  how  they  work  and  what  they  accomplish 
under  certain  conditions,  while   the  conditions  of  the 


182     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

future  on  which  all  depends  are  beyond  our  ken.  A 
study  of  natural  forces  reveals  to  us  how  they  will  act 
when  they  meet ;  but  only  under  the  operation  of  laws 
similar  to  those  governing  the  heavenly  bodies  can  we 
tell  whether  and  when  they  will  meet.  Not  for  the 
sake  of  prevision  chiefly  do  we  study  the  natural  forces ; 
we  want  to  know  them  in  order  to  use  them  for  our 
purposes.  While  we  may  not  be  able  to  tell  how  they 
will  act  when  left  to  themselves,  we  can  so  combine  or 
separate  them  as  to  accomplish  our  ends.  So  we  want 
to  master  the  social  forces  for  the  purpose  of  using 
them.  We  may  not  be  able  to  foretell  what  society 
will  be ;  but  by  prevision  of  what  it  ought  to  be  we  can 
work  toward  the  desired  social  end. 

While  definite  prophecy  and  scientific  prevision  are 
out  of  the  question,  there  may  be  well-grounded  expec- 
tations respecting  the  future.  With  the  natural  forces 
the  same  as  in  the  past,  and  with  human  nature,  how- 
ever modified  by  heredity  and  environment,  essentially 
the  same,  we  can  learn  from  the  rich  experience  of  the 
past  what  characteristics  may  be  expected  in  the  future. 
But  even  general  laws  as  the  basis  of  a  philosophy  of 
history  may  be  out  of  the  question  at  present.  No  past 
experience  can  be  a  perfect  type  of  the  future,  for  the 
conditions  constantly  vary ;  and  if  progress  is  made 
beyond  the  past,  no  inferior  stage  can  be  the  exact 
interpreter  of  the  higher  one. 

Besides  the  past,  of  which  in  some  measure  a  repeti- 
tion may  be  expected  in  the  future,  an  interpretation 
of  tlie  present  may  reveal  tendencies  whose  outcome  in 
the  immediate  future  can  be  predicated  as  probable. 
Sometimes  a  trend  contains  a  prophetic  element ;  it  is 
like  a  seed  which  contains  the  plant  that  will  spring 
from  it.     Yet  even  respecting  such  a  trend  we  cannot 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  183 

be  unerring  prophets,  except  in  a  most  general  way  and 
under  supposition  of  certain  conditions.  Something  un- 
foreseen may  occur  unexpectedly  and  give  a  new  direc- 
tion to  the  trend.  "  The  philosophy  of  history  at  large, 
explaining  the  past  and  predicting  the  future  phenomena 
of  man's  life  in  the  world  by  reference  to  general  laws, 
is  in  fact  a  subject  with  which,  in  tbe  present  state  of 
knowledge,  even  genius  aided  by  wide  research  seems 
hardly  able  to  cope."  ^  The  very  nature  of  the  objects 
of  Sociology  limits  its  efforts  at  mathematical  definite- 
ness  and  certainty.  "It  will  not  do  to  forget  that, 
according  to  the  nature  of  its  material.  Sociology  never 
can  get  the  same  positive  certainty  as  the  natural 
science  of  what  is  inorganic."  ^ 

Owing  to  the  checks  which  individuals  receive  in 
acting  on  one  another,  and  to  the  constitution,  the  laws, 
the  government,  and  all  the  permanent  institutions 
within  whose  limits  a  people  move,  a  nation  is  of  course 
less  variable  than  an  individual.  Large  bodies  move 
more  slowly  and  change  less  rapidly  than  small  ones. 
There  are  therefore  reasons  for  prevision  in  the  case  of 
states  and  also  of  masses  of  men  which  do  not  apply  to 
individuals.  But  constitutions,  laws,  and  institutions  of 
all  kinds,  and  organizations  are  also  liable  to  change.  If 
their  transformation  is  less  rapid  than  that  of  indi- 
viduals, on  account  of  the  numerous  factors  which  must 
be  changed,  it  is  more  permanent  and  produces  greater 
results.  Take  such  a  change  as  that  from  feudalism  to 
industrialism,  from  despotism  to  a  representative  gov- 
ernment, and  from  a  monarchy  to  a  republic.^ 

^  Tylor,  "  Primitive  Culture,"  i.,  5. 

2  Schaeffle,  "  Bau  und  Leben,"  i.,  466. 

3  Bacon  says  that  "  states  are  great  engines  moving  slowly."  "While 
this  is  true  in  general,  in  crises  states  may  move  with  rapidity  toward 


184     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

A  survey  of  the  whole  field  does  not  lead  to  a  re- 
jection of  the  various  efforts  at  prevision ;  in  this 
second  division  we  have  room  for  all  within  their  reach. 
We  do  not,  however,  want  to  cherish  delusive  hopes 
respecting  the  possibility  of  predictions.  The  true  stu- 
dent will  be  thankful  for  any  revelation  of  the  future 
legitimately  learned  from  the  experience  of  the  past  and 
read  in  the  signs  of  the  times  ;  but  he  also  knows  that  the 
precious  metals  found  in  history  and  our  age  have  a 
present  value,  regardless  of  what  their  currency  in  the 
future  may  be. 

Since  Mr.  Spencer  treats  society  from  the  evolutionary  point  of 
view,  his  Sociology  really  pertains  only  to  our  second  division.  So 
far  as  he  discusses  society  itself  it  is  merely  for  the  sake  of  getting 
a  basis  for  his  social  evolution.  In  the  three  volumes  entitled 
"  Princi]5les  of  Sociology,"  he  first  discusses  "  The  Data  of  Sociol- 
ogy." The  first  chapters,  on  "  Super-Organic  Evolution "  and 
"  The  Factors  of  Social  Phenomena,"  pertain  to  society  in  general. 
Then  follow  over  400  pages  on  j^rimitive  man  and  his  views  of 
things.  The  material  of  this  part  really  belongs  to  evolution 
itself,  giving  the  supposed  beginnings  of  the  human  family.  Then 
over  150  pages  are  devoted  to  "  Inductions  of  Sociology,"  in  v^'hich 
we  have  a  discussion  of  what  society  itself  is.  The  first  chapter 
is  headed :  "  What  is  a  Society  ?  "  He  says  :  "  This  question  has 
to  be  answered  at  the  outset.  Until  we  have  decided  vrhether 
or  not  to  regard  a  society  as  an  entity  ;  and  until  we  have  decided 
whether,  if  regarded  as  an  entity,  a  society  is  to  be  classed  as 
absolutely  unlike  all  other  entities  or  as  like  some  others;  our 
conception  of  the  subject-matter  before  us  remains  vague."  The 
remainder  of  the  first  volume  and  the  whole  of  the  other  two 
are  devoted  to  Social  Institutions  ;  namely,  Domestic,  Ceremonial, 
Political,  Ecclesiastical,  Professional,  and  Industrial. 

The  Institutions  named  are  all  in  society ;  but  they  are  in  it, 
they  cannot  be  the  whole  of  society.     Society  being  larger,  their 

revolution  or  reorganization,  or  through  processes  of  transformation. 
Illustrations  are  seen  in  Greece,  Rome,  France,  America,  Italy,  Germany, 
and  other  states. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  185 

discussion  does  uot  exhaust  Sociology.  In  the  sphere  of  aesthetics, 
of  religion,  of  politics,  of  education,  of  the  industries,  much  social 
action  cannot  be  classed  as  institutional.  Institutions  themselves 
are  advanced  because  individuals  and  societies  find  them  inade- 
quate, rise  above  them,  and  lift  them  to  a  higher  plane.  Society  is 
an  unbroken  unit,  an  atmosphere  in  which  we  move,  whether  or 
not  we  are  in  institutions ;  it  is  a  web  in  which  there  are  other 
than  institutional  threads. 

By  subjecting  man  severely  to  his  environment  during  the  pro- 
cess of  evolution  and  then  evolving  him  into  a  network  of  institu- 
tions, it  looks  as  if  he  were  wholly  subject  to  mechanical  processes. 
How  would  it  do  to  place  the  first  emphasis  on  what  is  to  be 
evolved,  namely,  man  himself,  and  then  treat  the  environment 
and  institutions  as  ministers  of  their  lord  ?  The  experiment  is 
worth  trying. 

Our  second  division  shows  the  intimate  relation  of  our  subject 
to  history,  without  being  identified  with  it.  The  system  of  the 
actual  working  of  the  social  forces  is  om"  aim  now,  not  the  history 
of  associations.  Not  now  as  in  the  first  division,  do  we  emphasize 
human  adaptation  to  society,  social  need,  social  force  as  the  social 
essence,  social  attraction  and  repulsion,  in  the  abstract ;  we  are 
intent  on  seeing  the  working  of  these  in  the  actual  construction  of 
society. 

As  in  this  second  division  our  aim  is  great  generalizations  from 
facts  rather  than  history ;  so  we  take  the  standpoint  of  sociological 
inquiry  instead  of  that  of  the  special  social  sciences.  Each  social 
factor  is  to  be  viewed  as  an  integral  part  of  the  totality.  We  can 
illustrate  this  by  the  economic  and  sociological  view  of  the  laborer. 
By  economics  he  is  regarded  as  so  much  strength  or  skill  to  be 
used  in  production,  and  the  exploitation  of  his  strength  and  skill 
has  often  been  pronounced  a  natural  economic  law.  But  Sociol- 
ogy views  the  laborer  as  also  so  much  political  force,  as  ethical, 
religious,  sesthetic,  and  intellectual;  that  is,  Sociology  regards  him 
in  all  his  relations  to  society,  and  in  these  relations  his  economic 
force  is  but  a  fraction.  In  order  that  the-laborer  may  receive  his 
proper  place  in  society,  the  economic  must  yield  to  the  sociological 
view.  The  capitalist,  the  politician,  the  professional  man,  must  all 
be  viewed  in  their  totality  of  powers  and  relations,  in  order  to 
occupy  their  proper  place  in  society.  It  is  characteristic  of  our 
second  division  to  contemplate  societies  from  the  comprehensive 
sociological  point  of  view. 


186     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

It  is  thus  evident  tliat  there  is  a  clear  distinction  between  the 
first  and  second  division.  At  the  same  time,  as  in  our  second  we 
aim  at  the  philosophy  of  the  marvellous  social  realism  of  the  past 
and  present,  it  is  sufficiently  distinguished  from  the  ordinary 
historic  disciplines.  Not  history  itseK,  but  the  principles  un- 
folded, the  forces  at  work,  and  the  laws  operating,  in  history,  are 
the  objects  of  our  search.  Our  aim  is  better  expressed  by  wliat 
Hegel  and  others  have  called  the  philosophy  of  history,  or  still 
better  by  the  social  philosophy  of  history.  How  far  a  social  phi- 
losophy of  the  past  and  present  can  be  constructed,  we  must  leave 
to  the  study  itself  to  determine. 

Of  the  importance  and  richness  of  this  division,  the  above  outline 
gives  no  adequate  conception.  We  have  all  the  evolutionary  forces 
in  their  actuality,  with  the  progress  they  produce,  with  the  institu- 
tions and  social  forms  that  result  from  their  operation.  AVhat  the 
principles  of  the  first  division  give  potentially  respecting  man  and 
his  environment,  is  now  to  be  followed  in  its  reality.  How  intel- 
lect, feeling,  and  will  work ;  the  body  and  the  physical  environ- 
ment ;  wliat  men  start  with,  and  then  become  by  heredity  and 
social  environment ;  imitation,  aspiration,  competition,  social 
friction;  the  growth  of  language,  religion,  institutions ;  the  indi- 
vidualizing and  socializing  influences  exerted  by  the  progTessive 
development  of  society;  what  is  WTought  socially  by  voluntary 
activity  and  by  necessity ;  how  far  man  is  independent  and  de- 
pendent—  these  and  numerous  other  factors  are  included  under 
this  division.  The  i)resent,  with  an  importance  for  every  mem- 
ber of  the  age  that  is  only  faintly  realized,  offers  the  most  inviting 
field  for  investigation.  Take,  for  instance,  a  country  like  the 
United  States,  with  the  remarkable  social  varieties  and  numerous 
distinct  social  groups ;  what  a  study !  And  then  to  relate  the 
United  States  to  the  social  organism  of  humanity ! 

AVe  recognize  the  social  energies  in  history,  and  their  opera- 
tions are  the  aim  of  our  search.  The  causative  connections  in 
society  are  of  especial  interest  to  us.  The  general  ideas  we  are 
after  in  this  division  are  well  illustrated  by  Lotze's  "  Microcosm," 
particularly  the  third  volume,  in  which  he  discusses  the  meaning 
of  history,  the  historic  forces,  progress,  and  society.  Grasped  in 
the  totality  of  his  historic  relations  the  individual  is  immeasurably 
exalted  ;  and  the  true  conception  of  him  is  in  this  totality,  not  in 
isolation.     Herbartsays:     "  No  man  stands  alone  ;  and  no  known 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  187 

age  is  independent ;  in  every  present  the  past  lives,  and  what  the 
individual  calls  his  personality  is  itself,  strictly  speaking,  a  web  of 
thoughts  and  emotions  which,  for  the  most  part,  only  repeats  what 
the  environing  society  owns  and  uses  as  an  intellectual  possession. 
•  .  .  The  whole  mass  of  perceptions  comes  as  certainly  from  the 
world  outside  of  us  as  does  om-  mother  tongue."  Not  as  isolated, 
but  as  connected,  causatively,  we  want  to  study  the  ages  and 
nations  and  institutions. 

We  can  perhaps  classify  all  association  as  follows :  — 

First,  natural,  that  into  which  we  are  born,  the  family,  the 
environment,  the  state,  and  the  like,  and  that  which  is  requii'ed 
by  the  very  condition  of  things  for  sustenance  and  defence. 

Second,  voluntary,  such  as  literaiy,  {esthetic,  and  numerous 
other  societies  which  we  enter  from  choice. 

Third,  natural  and  voluntary,  partly  due  to  the  nature  of  things, 
partly  to  choice.  The  latter  associations  are  probably  the  most 
numerous.  Indeed,  after  the  will  is  developed,  we  cannot  see  how 
the  force  of  circumstances  and  voluntai'y  activity,  sometimes  one 
being  more  potent,  then  the  other,  can  be  altogether  separated. 
Yet  as  the  one  or  the  other  predominates,  we  can  speak  of  the 
association  as  natural  or  voluntary. 

We  must  also  distinguish  society  as  formally  organized  and 
society  in  a  more  general  sense.  Even  among  unorganized  masses 
there  may  be  a  community  of  thought  and  feeling  and  interest, 
which  produces  a  certain  solidarity  and  similarity  of  movement. 
Schaeffle  (pp.  392-393)  gives  a  classification  of  these  unorganized 
societies. 

International  and  super-national  bonds,  what  are  they?  If 
thoughts,  interests,  in.stitutions,  churches,  which  are  not  national, 
yet  prevail  in  different  nations,  ought  they  to  be  called  interna- 
tional? In  that  case  international  denotes  locality  merely,  not 
nationality  at  all.  The  query  thus  arises  whether  there  are  not 
objects  which  should  be  called  extra-national  or  super-national. 
They  would  include  all  elements,  for  instance,  which  are  not 
characteristics  of  nations,  but  of  humanity,  independent,  there- 
fore, of  national  existence. 

In  this  second  division  the  various  factors  which  enter  society 
can  become  objects  of  special  inquiry,  namely,  individuals  as  pos- 
sessing and  exercising  the  social  forces,  nature,  the  relation  of  men 
to  nature,  and  the  associations  formed  by  men.     In  these  four 


188     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

factors  the  changes  which  characterize  social  evohition  can  be 
concentrated.  For  us  the  first  three  have  significance  for  the  sake 
of  the  fourth,  society,  in  which  thej-  are  involved. 

1.  Men  as  possessors  of  the  social  forces  change,  and  with  them 
the  forces  likewise.  This  change  characterizes  humanity  at  large. 
Acquired  characteristics  are  transmitted,  and  thus  generations  are 
permanently  affected.  The  laws  and  limits  of  changes  through 
heredity  are  imperfectly  understood  ;  but  that  the  changes  actually 
take  place  cannot  be  questioned.  To  the  physical  and  psychical 
modifications  of  individuals  must  be  added  the  effects  produced 
by  au  increase  in  numbers. 

2.  Besides  the  changes  in  the  individuals  of  society,  there  are 
those  in  the  natural  environment.  How  vastly  diiferent  the  same 
people  under  different  natural  conditions!  Where  nature  does 
nearly  everything  for  them,  as  in  the  tropics,  they  need  not  exert 
themselves  greatly,  and  readily  yield  to  the  enervating  influence  of 
the  climate.  Neither  can  great  progress  be  expected  where^the  mere 
struggle  for  existence  absoi'bs  the  energies.  To  make  the  most  of 
life  there  must  be  the  means  to  secui'e  a  livelihood.  Energy  is, 
however,  developed,  and  that  makes  this  condition  more  favorable 
than  the  other.  But  leisure  without  energy  and  energy  without 
leisure  are  both  unfavorable. 

The  most  effective  changes  in  the  natural  environment  are  the 
permanent  ones.  ^ligration,  emigration  are  important  factors. 
When  a  tribe  moves  inland  from  the  seashore,  it  may  become 
agi-icultural  instead  of  living  by  fishing  and  hunting,  and  thus  its 
mode  of  life  be  permanently  revolutionized.  A  people  moving  to 
the  seacoast  may  become  commercial,  as  the  Phoenicians.  Great 
changes  are  produced  by  removing  to  a  different  soil  and  climate. 

3.  Men  change,  their  natural  environment  changes,  but  also 
their  relation  to  that  environment.  The  view  of  nature  changes. 
The  ghost  and  the  fetich  vanish,  and  natural  objects  are  taken  as 
natural.  By  knowledge  and  skill  man  subdues  nature  and  makes 
it  his  minister.  He  learns  to  make  fire  easily,  he  manufactures 
rude  implements  for  farming,  he  employs  bow  and  arrow  and 
spear  in  warfare,  he  tames  animals  and  uses  them,  he  makes  boats 
and  facilitates  travel  and  transportation.  What  a  revolution  has 
been  wrought  by  steam  and  all  the  modern  improvements  in  the 
use  of  nature ! 

4.  To  the  changes  in  individuals  and  in  mere  increase  in  num- 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  189 

bers,  to  the  changes  in  nature  and  in  man's  relation  to  it,  we  add 
the  changes  in  the  social  environment.  These  are  the  changes 
which  most  deeply  affect  men  in  their  associated  relations.  There 
ai"e  social  creations  into  which  society  puts  its  thought,  its  feeling, 
and  its  wiU,  which  mark  and  promote  the  progi-ess  of  humanity. 
These  are  permanent  and  cumulative  social  products.  Before 
writing,  amid  the  migration  of  tribes,  many  traditions,  arts,  inven- 
tions, may  have  been  lost.  Not  every  people  had  its  Homer.  The 
permanent  effects  in  social  environment  were  produced  by  such 
treasures  of  culture  which  abided,  to  which  generation  after  gen- 
eration added  its  share.  To  the  changes  in  the  social  environment 
belong  all  those  influences  which  affected  the  association  and  rela- 
tion of  men.  Changes  took  place  in  the  family,  in  the  agricultural 
and  industrial  relations,  in  the  religious  bonds,  in  manners  and 
customs,  in  the  government,  in  ethical  views  and  in  conduct,  in 
aesthetics,  in  language  and  literature ;  and  all  these  affected  the 
condition  of  society  and  the  progi'ess  of  civilization. 

These  four  ideas  are  not  isolated.  All  the  factors  under  each 
head  are  intimately  connected,  and  those  classified  together  are 
also  organically  united  to  the  factors  under  the  other  heads.  The 
changes  in  individuals,  in  the  natural  environment,  in  men's  rela- 
tion to  nature,  and  in  the  social  environment,  produce  one  another, 
are  co-operative,  and  belong  to  one  and  the  same  process  of  devel- 
opment. But  with  aU  their  intricate  interaction  and  organic 
union,  the  analysis  of  social  movements  into  these  four  ideas  will 
help  us  to  understand  social  groups,  nations,  and  humanity;  they 
aid  us  in  interpreting  the  past  and  present,  and  in  forecasting  the 
future. 

The  comprehensive  view  aimed  at  by  Sociology  may  lead  to 
hasty  generalization.  Xot  only  is  there  danger  of  making  general 
or  even  universal  what  is  only  particular,  but  also  of  postulating 
causes  which  do  not  exist.  A  particular  cause  must  always  pro- 
duce the  same  effect ;  but  the  same  effect  may  result  from  a  score 
of  causes.  Death  can  result  from  poison,  suicide,  or  hundreds  of 
diseases  and  accidents.  The  temptation  to  substitute  imaginary 
for  real  causes  is  peculiarly  great  respecting  primitive  man  and 
wherever  trustworthy  historic  data  are  wanting.  The  scientific 
student  knows  how  to  estimate  the  writers  who  show  how  an 
event  may  have  occurred  and  then  dogmatically  affirm  that  thus  it 
came  to  pass. 


190     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Many  causes,  for  instance,  may  have  led  to  the  formation  of 
the  state ;  but  in  the  absence  of  valid  information  we  can  only 
surmise  which  was  the  producing  cause.  Social  forms  and  cus- 
toms in  a  region  may  have  originated  in  one  way,  while  in  others 
similar  ones  were  due  to  a  different  origin.  It  is  at  times  difficidt 
to  decide  whether  a  custom  or  form  originated  with  a  people  or 
was  transmitted  to  them  by  others.  The  same  superstition  may 
originate  in  different  ways ;  this  is  also  true  of  ethical  conceptions, 
of  authority,  respect,  shame,  and  the  like.  Does  the  possibility 
that  religion  may  have  arisen  from  fear  prove  that  as  its  actual 
origin  ?  Why  does  religion  still  continue  after  the  fear  or  super- 
stition or  ignorance,  which  was  supposed  to  give  it  birth,  has 
vanished?  Of  some  customs  and  institutions  we  can  hardly  say 
more  than  that  they  have  a  basis  in  human  nature,  that  they  meet 
some  need ;  and  if  that  is  all  we  can  say,  it  is  better  to  say  no 
more,  certainly  wiser  than  to  become  dogmatists  in  order  to  hide 
our  ignorance. 

In  order  to  understand  the  historic  evolution  of  society,  all  the 
social  forces  must  be  taken  into  account,  each  in  its  proper  place 
and  in  its  interaction  with  the  other  forces.  When  we  consider  this 
requirement  for  mastering  the  history  of  the  past,  we  realize  how 
little  of  it  is  within  our  reach.  Effects  are  recorded,  but  the  real 
causes  are  often  obscure,  leaving  room  for  the  conflicting  interpre- 
tations of  the  same  event  by  historians.  The  purpose,  on  which 
so  much  depends  in  human  action,  is  often  hidden  even  from 
observers,  and  still  more  from  those  remote  in  space  and  time  from 
the  scene. 

The  study  of  the  ages  is  largely  an  inquiry  into  their  dominant 
energies,  some  thoughts,  or  feelings,  or  purposes,  which  rule. 
While  all  the  energies  operating  in  society  at  a  particular  time 
must  l)e  known  for  the  interpretation  of  the  associations  of  that 
period,  special  importance  attaches  to  their  relative  dominance. 
Often  society  best  expresses  itself  in  a  specific  aim  which  con- 
centrates and  controls  the  associative  factors.  To  an  age,  as  to  an 
individual,  the  ruling  passion  may  be  the  key.  When  money 
becomes  the  absorbing  aim,  morals,  religion,  and  personalities  are 
subordinated  to  its  attainment.  The  rule  of  Napoleon  illustrates 
the  dominance  of  the  military  spirit,  with  its  love  of  conquest  and 
glory.  Sometimes  religious  motives  determine  the  character  of 
ages,  as  has  so  often  been  the  case  among  Jews,  Christians,  and 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  191 

Mohammedans.  Especially  when  supreme  interests  are  at  stake 
and  intense  feeling  is  aroused,  do  we  find  some  dominant  purpose 
as  the  concent)-ative  and  directive  energy  of  tlie  age. 

In  this  study  of  ages  according  to  their  ruling  types  it  is  essential 
for  sociological  purposes  to  inquire  how  the  dominance  is  gained 
and  maintained  by  particular  social  forces.  How  does  it  happen 
that  these  forces  do  not  work  harmoniously,  each  in  its  place  and 
co-operating  with  the  rest,  no  marked  prominence  being  given  to 
a  particular  one  ?  And  how  does  it  come  that  now  certain  forces 
take  the  lead  and  then  yield  the  prominence  to  others  ?  It  re- 
quires no  proof  to  show  that  the  golden  mean  is  not  kept  by  the 
social  energies  in  their  relation  to  one  another,  and  that  history 
does  not  move  along  the  line  of  that  symmetry  which  was  the  ideal 
of  the  Gi'eeks. 

Were  society  literally  an  organism  the  course  of  history  would 
be  inexplicable ;  but  if  it  consists  of  the  energies  of  the  different 
organisms,  then  its  history  can  be  understood.  History,  then, 
changes  with  these  organisms  and  their  relations  to  one  another. 
Society  itself  is  modified  by  the  influences  which  affect  individuals. 
These  influences  are  countless  and  subject  to  constant  change. 
But  not  only  are  the  horse-shoes  altered,  and  with  them  their 
magnetism,  but  the  relation  of  the  horse-shoes  is  changed.  The 
prophets  of  the  ages  differ ;  the  schools  they  form  differ ;  and  thus 
the  ages  they  mould  differ.  So  interests  vary,  and  with  them  the 
tendencies  they  promote.  We  emphasize  society,  but  do  not  for- 
get that,  in  spite  of  the  opposition  to  hero-worship,  one  man  may 
make  an  age  or  be  the  embodiment  of  its  ruling  motive.  What 
he  becomes  he  impresses  on  the  community,  as  the  head  of  a 
family,  the  chief  of  a  tribe,  the  priest,  medicine-man,  sage,  teacher, 
or  wanior.  What  is  true  of  a  limited  social  group  also  applies 
to  large  bodies.  The  dominant  purpose  may  depend  on  authori- 
tative persons  and  associations,  on  natural  conditions,  on  new 
discoveries,  or  on  social  tendencies.  A  change  of  rulers  in  Constan- 
tinople puts  Europe  in  a  ferment ;  a  famine  in  India  changes  the 
world's  market ;  Mohammedan  fanaticism  may  be  aroused  and 
engage  Christendom  in  warfare.  A  single  strike  may  assume  such 
vast  propoi'tions  as  to  endanger  nations.  Give  Russia  the  control 
of  Turkey,  and  with  France  as  its  ally  the  control  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, how  will  English  supremacy  in  Egypt  be  maintained,  and 
England  keep  its  route  through  the  Suez  Canal  unobstructed  and 
its  rule  in  India  uncontested  ? 


192     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

In  every  age  it  is  what  seems  of  peculiar  importance  which 
determines  the  dominance,  what  meets  the  most  pressing  need, 
what  relieves  pain  and  aft'ords  pleasure,  what  is  most  appreciated, 
most  ardently  craved,  and  inspu'es  the  highest  hope.  It  is  thus 
evident  that  the  appetite,  the  feeling,  and  the  general  state  of 
consciousness,  have  much  to  do  with  the  matter.  The  variety  in 
the  dominance  of  particular  social  forces  at  various  times  is  due  to 
the  changes  which  take  place  in  the  needs,  feelings,  and  convic- 
tions of  men,  and  in  their  circumstances.  It  would  be  strange  if 
what  is  deemed  of  greatest  importance  at  a  time  did  not  enlist  the 
greatest  energies.  An  error  believed  is  no  less  effective  than  a 
truth  believed,  in  determining  the  courses  of  men.  A  false 
prophet  who  appeals  to  the  passions  may  be  more  effective  than  a 
true  prophet  who  appeals  to  reason. 

A  social  force  may  continue  its  dominance  after  the  occasion 
which  gave  it  the  supremacy  has  passed  away.  The  military 
spirit  often  continues  after  the  foe  who  aroused  it  has  been  van- 
quished. So  every  other  social  force  may  live  as  a  past  impulse 
rather  than  present  necessity. 

Only  in  the  most  general  terms  can  we  give  the  interpretation 
for  the  continued  dominance  of  certain  forces.  The  needs  and 
occasions  which  determined  their  dominance  may  continue.  The 
foe  may  be  conquered,  yet  it  may  be  necessary  always  to  be  pre- 
pared to  meet  a  foe.  But  another  reason  is  weighty.  Exercise  de- 
velops the  faculty  or  power  exercised.  Although  at  first  the  use  of 
the  power  may  be  a  trial,  its  exercise  in  the  course  of  time  becomes 
easy,  natural,  and  even  a  pleasure.  The  strength  it  gains  deter- 
mines the  line  of  least  resistance.  The  mind  by  conscious  effort 
is  ti-ained  to  move  unconsciously  and  resistlessly  in  particular 
directions.  What  is  true  of  a  single  individual  is  true  of  all 
individuals.  Habits  are  formed,  customs  arise,  traditions  prevail ; 
the  appetite  gi'ows  by  what  it  feeds  on  ;  a  power  continually  exer- 
cised develops,  it  attains  the  pre-eminence,  and  then  more  easily 
retains  than  it  originally  gained  the  dominance.  A  man  is 
absorbed  in  an  effort  to  obtain  a  competence ;  but  when  he  has 
obtained  it,  all  his  powers  have  been  trained  solely  for  this  end, 
and  his  life  itself  is  devoted  to  accumulations  for  which  his  past 
training  is  the  only  reason. 

Individuals,  society,  institutions,  being  all  permeated,  trained, 
and  carried  along  by  this  dominant  force,  it  is  difficult  to  change 


TUE  UliSTOUlCAL  EVOLUTION.  193 

the  trend,  eveu  if  the  most  urgent  reasons  for  doing  so  exist. 
Reason  has  no  weight  with  an  ii-rational  conservatism,  which  does 
things  only  because  they  were  done  in  the  past.  A  few  feel  the 
need  of  change,  they  impart  their  feelings,  which  thus  become 
more  general,  and  their  very  antagonism  to  conservatism  tends  to 
make  them  radical.  Conservatives  consider  only  what  is  to  be 
conserved,  and  are  blind  to  the  new  that  deserves  acceptance ;  the 
radicals  consider  only  what  is  new  and  calculated  to  overcome  con- 
servative ills,  and  are  blind  to  the  good  in  the  past.  In  the  con- 
flict which  results,  revolution  may  be  the  only  solution.  Especially 
in  times  of  crises  are  there  but  few  who  equally  appreciate  in  the 
old  the  good  and  reject  its  evils,  and  the  truth  of  the  new  while 
free  from  its  errors  and  extremes.  But  in  distinction  from  the 
extremes  of  conservatism  and  radicalism,  these  fev/  are  the  truly 
progressive  ones.  History  is  largely  a  movement  and  conflict  of 
extremes,  and  progress  the  union  of  the  truth  in  the  extremes. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  numerous  principles  which 
have  been  thought  bj^  different  investigators  to  determine  social 
evolution.  One,  however  has  gained  such  prominence  and  general 
acceptance  that  it  deserves  brief  discussion  eveu  in  an  introductory 
work.  In  his  "  First  Principles  "  Mr.  Spencer  applies  the  biologi- 
cal law  of  evolution  to  society,  and  claims  that  in  it  we  have  a 
principle  of  so  fundamental  a  character  as  to  indicate  the  progres- 
sive development  of  all  association.  He  holds  that  in  the  case  of 
living  organisms  the  process  of  evolution  is  invariably  from  homo- 
geneity to  heterogeneity  of  structure ;  that  is,  the  development 
consists  in  diiferentiation.  "It  is  settled  beyond  dispute  that 
organic  evolution  consists  in  a  change  from  the  homogeneous  to  the 
heterogeneous."^  "From  the  remotest  past  which  science  can 
fathom,  up  to  the  novelties  of  j'esterday,  that  in  which  evolution 
essentially  consists,  is  the  transformation  of  the  homogeneous  into 
the  heterogeneous."'-^  This  transfoi-mation  is  not  regarded  a.s 
the  only  factor  in  evolution,  but  it  is  regarded  as  being  without 
exception. 3 

This  law  is  applied  by  Mr.  Spencer  likewise  to  aU  human  and 
social  affairs.  "  Whether  it  be  in  the  development  of  the  earth,  in 
the  development  of  life  uijon  its  surface,  in  the  development  of 
society,  of  government,  of  mauuf actxu-es,  of  commerce,  of  language, 

1  First  Principles,  148.  2  ibid.  174. 

•^  All  the  factors  are  given  on  p.  21G. 

13 


11)4     INTRODUCTION   TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

literature,  science,  art,  this  same  advance  from  the  simple  to  the 
complex,  through  successive  dilt'ereutiations,  holds  uniformly. 
From  the  earliest  traceable  cosmical  changes  down  to  the  latest 
results  of  civilization,  we  shall  find  that  the  transformation  of  the 
homogeneous  into  the  heterogeneous  is  that  in  which  evolution 
essentially  consists."  ^  Beginning  witli  the  nebular  hypothesis,  he 
attempts  to  trace  this  law  throughout  inorganic  matter,  through 
all  forms  of  life,  and  through  every  phase  of  human  association. 
At  the  close  of  his  elaborate  examination  he  pronounces  the  law 
universal.  "  Among  all  orders  of  phenomena  that  lie  within  the 
sphere  of  observation,  we  see  ever  going  on  the  process  of  change 
above  defined ;  and  many  significant  indications  warrant  us  in 
believing  that  the  same  process  of  change  went  on  throughout 
that  remote  past  which  lies  beyond  the  sphere  of  observation. 
If  we  must  form  any  conclusion  respecting  the  general  course 
of  things,  past,  present,  and  future,  the  one  which  the  evidence  as 
far  as  it  goes  justifies,  and  the  only  one  for  which  there  is  any 
justification,  is,  that  the  change  from  an  indeterminate  uniformity 
to  a  determinate  multiformity  which  we  everywhere  see  going  on, 
has  been  going  on  from  the  first,  and  will  continue  to  go  on."  ^ 

This  supposed  principle  is  an  illustration  of  the  caution  that 
should  be  exercised  in  formulating  laws  of  universal  application, 
and  in  applying  biological  evolution  to  social  evolution.  This 
tlieory  of  evolution  is  the  most  essential  factor  in  Mr.  Spencer's 
philosophy.  Behind  it  is  the  Unknowable,  which  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  our  faculties ;  but  this  evolution  lies  within  the  legitimate 
sphei'e  of  human  inquiry. 

The  general  acceptance  of  the  theory  may  make  us  hesitate  to 
criticise  it ;  but  the  very  fact  that  it  is  so  often  thoughtlessly  repeated 
and  pronounced  absolute  and  final,  makes  criticism  the  more  neces- 
sary. While  the  process  described  is  common,  yet  it  is  not  a  law 
universally  applicable.  It  is  a  philosophical  hvpothesis  whose  ap- 
I>lication  to  society  is  limited ;  and  for  tliis  reason  we  deny  its  claim 
as  a  sociological  principle  or  law.  As  an  effort  to  subject  human 
society  to  biological  and  even  cosmical  laws  it  is  manifestly  a 
failure,  not  taking  into  account  sufficiently  the  peculiarities  of 
human  society. 

Let  us  follow  closely  INIr.  Spencer's  reasoning  and  illustrations. 
He  illustrates  the  process  from  the  liomogeneous  to  the  hetei'o- 
1  Op.  cit.  148-9.  2  Ibid.  218. 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  lOo 

geneoiis  by  referring  to  a  wandering  tribe  of  savages.  "  As  we  see 
in  existing  barbarous  tribes,  society  in  its  first  and  lowest  form  is 
a  homogeneous  aggregation  of  individuals  having  like  powers  and 
like  functions:  the  only  marked  difference  of  function  being  that 
which  accompanies  difference  of  sex."  ^  As  social  evolution  pro- 
gresses, "  a  differentiation  between  the  governing  and  the  governed  " 
takes  place,  which  continues  till  one  man  becomes  governor  and 
the  supreme  power  finally  becomes  hereditary  in  a  family. 
"  Gradually,  as  the  tribe  progi-esses,  the  contrast  between  the  gov- 
erning and  the  governed  grows  more  decided." 

In  another  place  '^  he  teaches  the  same  doctrine.  In  the  begin- 
ning, "  political  authority  is  neither  well  established  nor  precise. 
Distinctions  of  rank  are  neither  clearly  established  nor  impassable." 
But  in  the  process  of  evolution  "  the  distinction  between  the  royal 
race  and  the  people  grows  so  extreme  as  to  amount  in  the  popular 
apprehension  to  a  difference  of  nature.  The  warrior-class  attains 
a  perfect  separation  from  classes  devoted  to  the  cultivation  of  the 
soil,  or  other  occupations  regarded  as  servile.  And  there  arises  a 
priesthood  that  is  defined  in  its  rank,  its  functions,  its  privileges. 
This  sharpness  of  definition,  gi'owing  both  greater  and  more 
variously  exemplified  as  societies  advance  to  maturity,  is  extremest 
in  those  that  have  reached  their  fullest  development  or  are 
declining." 

IMr.  Spencer  overlooks  a  large  number  of  facts,^  and  forgets 
that  by  means  of  reflection  and  by  choosing  particular  ends  for 
which  to  live,  man  can  take  a  course  different  from  that  of  in- 
organic matter  and  the  animals  beneath  him.  There  has  been 
as  distinct  an  evolution  from  political  heterogeneity  to  political 
homogeneity,  as  an  evolution  which  developed  "the  distinction 
between  the  royal  race  and  the  people."  There  was  a  process 
which  resulted  in  making  one  the  ruler  and  all  the  rest  subjects,  or 
which  made  a  few  noblemen  or  aristocrats  the  rulers,  and  the  masses 
the  ruled.  But  since  then  the  very  opposite  process  has  been 
powerful.  This  evolution  moved  from  heterogeneity  to  homo- 
geneity. The  distinction  between  sovereign  and  subject  was  wiped 
out,  and  all  became  equally  sovereign  and  equally  subject.  From 
the  freedom  of  one  or  a  few  and  the  subjection  of  the  many,  the 

1  Op.  cit.  158.  2  Ibid.  188. 

3  They  are  by  no  means  only  "  apparent  exceptions,"  p.  190,  but  real  and 
weighty  ones. 


19u     JSTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

evolution  has  proceeded  toward  the  freedom  of  all.  Nobility  by 
heredity,  once  making  such  marked  distinctions  in  society,  has 
yielded  to  homogeneity  of  rights  and  privileges,  regardless  of  birth. 
In  the  eighteenth  century  the  evolution  which  had  made  the  king 
the  state  turned  from  heterogeneity  toward  homogeneity,  by  pro- 
claiming equality  of  rights  and  the  sovereignty  of  the  people. 
The  same  process  has  taken  place  respecting  the  ballot  and  the 
right  to  hold  office,  property  qualifications  being  abolished  and 
homogeneity  established.  Not  only  have  we  evidences  of  this 
species  of  evolution  in  the  United  States,  France,  and  Switzerland, 
but  students  of  the  times  declare  the  trend  to  political  equality  one 
of  the  strongest  characteristics  of  our  age. 

This  evolution  is  clearly  the  very  opposite  of  that  described  by 
Mr.  Spencer,  and  a  single  instance  proves  that  what  he  establishes 
as  a  rule  in  many  cases  is  not  a  law.  Nor  is  this  striking  excep- 
tion to  his  supposed  law  explained  by  his  later  and  more  complete 
statement  of  evolution  as  involving  a  process  from  indefiniteness 
to  definiteness,  and  as  a  process  of  integration.  The  definiteness 
between  sovereign  and  subject  vanishes,  and  the  result  is  not  pro- 
duced by  an  integration  of  heterogeneous  parts,  but  by  actually 
I)utting  homogeneity  in  place  of  heterogeneity. 

The  same  process  is  seen  in  other  departments.  For  many  ages 
woman  is  severely  limited  to  a  particular  sphere,  men  having  a 
complete  monopoly  of  certain  callings.  Then  there  is  a  growth  of 
homogeneity,  women  becoming  preachers,  doctors,  lawyers,  taking 
the  places  of  men  in  stores  and  offices,  and  becoming  competitors 
of  men  in  factories.  Or  shall  this  be  called  a  development  toward 
heterogeneity  among  women,  while  with  respect  to  humanity  it  is  a 
development  toward  homogeneity  ?  It  is  clearly  not  an  integration 
of  heterogeneity  in  society,  but  its  supplanting  by  homogeneity. 

Evolution  has  developed  individualism  in  the  industries,  with  a 
sharp  distinction  between  capitalists  and  laborers.  But  is  there 
not  also  a  decided  tendency  in  the  direction  of  socialism?  There 
is  a  movement  toward  industrial  partnership,  making  laborers 
partakers,  with  capitalists,  of  the  profits,  whereas  formerly  some 
took  all  the  profits  and  the  rest  were  mere  wage-earners.  Still 
stronger  is  the  trend  from  heterogeneity  to  homogeneity  in  the  case 
of  co-operative  societies,  in  which  all  are  capitalists  and  all  laborers- 
Even  so  strong  an  advocate  of  individualism  as  Mr.  Spencer 
cannot  deny  these  facts ;  nor  can  the  tendencies  toward  liberty  and 


THE  HISTORICAL  EVOLUTION.  197 

equality,  whether  in  politics  or  the  industi'ies,  be  disposed  of  by 
pronouncing  them  evidences  of  decay.  They  are  conclusive  proof 
that  the  perfection  of  national  development  may  involve  a  trend 
toward  homogeneity  as  well  as  to  heterogeneity.  The  fact  is  that 
progress  consists  in  the  development  both  of  diversity  and  of  unity. 

Is  further  proof  required?  Mr.  Spencer's  statement  that  in 
the  process  of  evolution  "  there  arises  a  priesthood  that  is  defined 
in  its  rank,  its  functions,  its  privileges,"  is  a  half-truth.  It  is  just 
as  true  that  there  is  a  process  of  development  when  priest  and 
people  are  more  and  more  assimilated  to  each  other,  and  there  may 
even  come  a  time  when  it  is  declared  that  all,  without  exception, 
are  kings  and  priests  unto  God. 

But  one  more  instance.  Pi'ocesses  of  differentiation  take  place 
among  nations,  churches,  and  organizations,  developing  peculiarities 
sharply  and  increasing  the  heterogeneity ;  but  no  less  marked  is 
the  opposite  process,  which  increases  their  homogeneity  at  the 
expense  of  their  heterogeneity.  Nations  learn  from  one  another, 
recognize  and  cultivate  mutual  interests,  become  assimilated  to 
one  another,  form  alliances,  create  international  law,  and  establish 
courts  of  arbitration.  The  term  "cosmopolitanism"  is  signifi- 
cant ;  such  is  the  homogeneity  produced  by  civilization  that  out-of- 
the-way  places  must  be  entered  to  behold  the  former  heterogeneity. 
Many  of  the  old  distinctions  between  the  city  and  country  even 
are  vanishing. 

Denominations  which  once  developed  their  peculiarities  and 
repelled  one  another,  are  now  discovering  and  emphasizing  ele- 
ments of  unity  and  becoming  more  homogeneous.  This  is  seen 
in  the  union  of  Lutherans  and  Reformed  in  the  same  state  church 
in  Germany,  also  in  the  nearer  approach  of  Protestant  churches  to 
one  another  in  other  lands.  It  is  seen  in  the  tendencies  toward 
union  on  the  part  of  the  English,  the  Greek,  and  even  the  Roman 
Catholic  church.  The  same  process  is  seen  in  other  associations 
whose  antagonism  was  greatest  at  the  start  and  decreased  with 
age.  In  philosophical  and  theological  schools  the  tendency  to 
coalesce  and  unite  is  a  common  phenomenon  in  the  process  of 
evolution. 

The  evil  in  the  false  theory  of  IVIr.  Spencer  consists  in  that  it 
puts  society  on  too  low  a  plane,  subjecting  it  to  a  biological  law, 
but  not  doing  justice  to  human  foresight,  to  teleological  action  on 
the  part  of  man,  and  to  social  ideals.     Then,  the  adoption  of  this 


198     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

law  fetters  society  to  past  processes  of  differentiation,  when 
human  advance  may  require  a  develoiiment  toward  homogeneity. 

We  admit  the  extensive  application  of  Mr.  Spencer's  theory  of 
evolution,  but  are  obliged  to  reject  it  as  a  sociological  principle. 
It  has  its  place  ;  but  it  is  not  a  universal  law  for  interpreting  the 
past  and  the  present,  nor  is  it  a  guide  for  prevision  respecting  the 
social  development  of  the  future. 

Siminel  ("  Sociale  Differenzierung,"  9)  regards  social  phenomena 
as  so  complicated  that  no  definite  estimate  of  their  results  is  possi- 
ble. This  in  fact  seems  to  be  the  general  conviction.  In  "Essays  in 
Philosophical  Criticism,"  edited  by  Seth  and  Haldane,  we  read  (p. 
104) :  "  The  application  of  the  historical  method  to  the  social 
sciences  has  a  ditficulty  of  its  own,  and  the  historical  prediction  which 
Comte  claims  for  Sociology  can  only  belong  to  it  to  a  very  limited 
extent."  L.  Stephen  develops  the  ethical  doctrine  in  harmony 
with  evolutionary  principles,  but  he  regards  prediction  impossible. 
He  says  (18-20)  :  "  I  need  not  say  how  short-sighted  are  the  ablest 
statesmen,  and  how  constantly  that  which  happens  is  precisely 
the  one  thing  which  nobody  foresaw,  but  which,  after  the  event, 
appears  to  have  been  just  what  every  one  should  have  foreseen." 
But  if  we  cannot  tell  even  what  the  morrow  will  bring  forth, 
"what  shall  be  said  respecting  more  remote  periods?  Numerous 
questions  respecting  the  effects  of  influences  on  an  individual  are 
unanswerable  ;  but  how  much  more  difficult  the  question  becomes 
when  thousands  and  millions  are  concerned ?  "If  we  can  give 
some  vague  answer  to  such  questions,  it  is  clearly  not  such  an 
answer  as  can  be  called  scientific,  or  as  enables  us  to  give  any 
definite  prediction  of  results.  .  .  .  When  we  reflect  upon  the  ex- 
treme difficulty  of  obtaining  the  necessary  knowledge,  of  appre- 
ciating the  state  of  mind  of  millions  of  men,  of  discovering  the 
latent  passions  which  may  be  smouldering  amongst  them,  their 
state  of  accessibility  to  new  ideas  and  new  conditions  of  life,  we 
may  well  feel  the  untrustworthiness  of  our  so-called  scientific 
methods.  The  discovery  of  a  new  principle  in  mechanics  or  the 
promulgation  of  a  new  religious  creed  may  alter  the  whole  social 
state,  or  bring  about  political  and  social  convulsions.  But  how 
can  we  predict  new  discoveries  or  new  creeds?  To  foretell  a  dis- 
covery is  to  make  the  discovery  yourself,  and  to  make  it  before  its 
time.  .  .  .  Any  one  who  should  have  prophesied  the  history  of 
the  present  century  at  its  beginning  with  any  precision  would 


THE  HI.'STORICAL  EVOLUTION.  199 

have  had  himself  to  foresee  the  course  of  science,  the  attitude 
taken  by  the  greatest  thinkers,  the  influence  upon  men's  imagina- 
tions of  new  conceptions  of  the  world,  and  to  have  traced  out  an 
incalculable  series  of  changes  in  the  relations  of  classes,  and  to 
determine  the  effect  of  all  these  changes  upon  the  material  condi- 
tions of  existence." 

So  much  space  has  been  devoted  to  the  subject  because  some 
think  there  must  be  social  prevision  because  Comte  said  so. 
Others  seek  to  reduce  Sociology  to  a  science  and  a  method  which 
are  to  insure  the  exactness  and  prevision  of  natural  science. 
These  errors  had  to  be  met. 

If  we  cannot  predicate  an  innate  impulse  to  progress  of  human 
nature,  we  must  suppose  the  conditions  for  progress  to  exist  there. 
The  capacity  with  which  man  starts  must  be  the  germ  of  all  his 
future  development.  The  very  necessities  of  his  existence  are 
calculated  to  call  forth  his  energies.  He  must  struggle  with 
nature  and  with  his  fellow-men.  Biit  even  in  the  primitive  state 
there  is  something  else  than  struggle.  Affection,  friendship,  family 
ties,  ti'ibal  relations,  and  the  force  of  circumstances  lead  to  co- 
operation. If  there  had  been  nothing  but  the  perpetual  warfare 
about  the  cradle  of  our  race  which  some  imagine,  it  is  hard  to  see 
how  humanity  could  have  escaped  extinction. 

As  culture  advances,  man  not  only  emancipates  himself  more 
and  more  from  the  dominion  of  nature,  but  he  subdues  it  by  mak- 
ing it  minister  to  his  purposes.  As  he  grows  and  gets  a  taste  of 
knowledge  and  art  and  all  the  higher  concerns  of  life,  we  can  un- 
derstand how  he  may  have  an  impulse  toward  more  culture.  But 
so  long  as  he  has  no  knowledge  of  the  better  things  of  mind  and 
heart,  we  cannot  well  conceive  what  there  is  for  him  to  aspire  to. 
In  some  degree  wonder  may  be  excited  and  aspiration  aroused ; 
and  the  primitive  religions  may  sometimes  reveal  an  effort,  or  at 
least  a  desire,  to  rise.  But  whatever  impulse  beyond  the  existing 
stage  may  be  found,  it  is  a  dark  feeling  rather  than  an  intelligent 
forward  movement.  Of  how  many  in  our  most  advanced  nations 
can  it  be  said  that  they  are  impelled  to  make  life  progressive  ? 

A  distinction  ought  to  be  made  between  social  and  associative 
forces.  Hatred  and  revenge  are  social  forces  so  far  as  they  affect 
society,  but  they  are  not  associative.  They  separate  rather  than 
unite  men.  "  Anti-social "  might  be  used  for  such  affections  so  far 
as  disintegrative ;  that  would  mean  that  they  are  not  only  anti- 
associative,  but  actually  destructive  of  society. 


200     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Mr.  L.  F.  "Ward  ("Dynamic  Sociology,"  I.,  460)  says,  "  Society, 
in  its  literal  or  primary  sense,  is  simply  an  association  of  indi- 
viduals." A  few  pages  further  on  he  gives  a  discussion  of  "  The 
Social  Forces,"  which  he  divides  into  those  "  absolutely  essential 
to  life  "  and  such  as  are  non-essential.  The  former  include  the  pre- 
servative and  reproductive  forces ;  the  latter,  or  non-essential,  the 
aesthetic,  emotional,  and  intellectual  forces. 

EEFLECTIONS. 

Relation  of  the  Second  to  the  First  Division.  The  Idea 
of  Evolution  in  Modern  Thought.  Subdivisions.  Study  of 
our  own  Age.  Its  Relation  to  the  Past  and  Future.  Clas- 
sification of  Social  Impulses.  Reason  in  History.  Sub- 
stantial and  Causative  Factors  in  Evolution.  Hotv  are 
Ne'wr  Forces  introduced  into  Society  ?  Co-operation  and  An- 
tagonism of  Forces.  How  far  have  Social  Creations  an  In- 
dependent Existence?  Sub-conscious  and  Semi-conscious 
Forces.  Possibility  of  Prevision.  Does  a  Social  Organ- 
ism depend  v^holly  on  its  Member.'s  for  its  Character  ?  The 
Social  Mechanism.  Social  Stagnation.  Progress  in  Hu- 
manity. Transitory  and  Permanent  Factors  in  Evolution. 
Social  Institutions.  The  Sociologist's  Aim  in  the  Study  of 
History.  Value  of  Types,  Characteristics,  Laws.  Unity  in 
the  Diversity  of  Social  Development.  Development  from 
Homogeneity  to  Heterogeneity.      Review  of  the  Chapter. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  201 


CHAPTER  VII. 

SOCIOLOGICAL    ETHICS,    OR   THE    PROGRESS 
OF    SOCIETY. 

The  Problem.  Why  not  stop  our  sociological  inquiries 
with  the  evolution  of  society  ?  In  order  to  justify  this 
third  division,  its  organic  connection  with  the  other  two 
must  he  shown.  If  we  learn  the  forces  of  society  and  the 
conditions  of  progress,  why  not  apply  the  results  to  the 
future  development  of  society  ? 

It  must  he  determined  what  is  meant  hy  ethics  as  a 
department  of  Sociology.  The  emphasis  must  he  placed 
on  morality ;  hut  the  moral  ought  to  he  put  into  harmo- 
nious relations  ivith  all  the  other  social  factors.  The 
prohlem  pertains  to  the  entire  progress  of  society,  and 
therefore  to  the  total  conditions  for  this  progress. 

Its  conditions  of  progress  must  he  sought.  The  aim  of 
progress  should  he  settled  in  order  to  fix  the  goal  of  social 
effort.  Is  this  aim  social  or  individual  ?  What  is  the 
ideal  of  social  ethics  ?  The  question  of  prevision  in  Sociol- 
ogy has  special  significance  for  this  third  division. 

We  make  a  distinction  hetween  theoretical  and  practical 
ethics,  the  science  and  the  art.  It  is  our  aim  to  get  the 
principles  for  social  progress  as  the  hasis  for  ethical 
action. 

Nature  has  causes  and  facts  :  the  mind  sets  an  end  for 
itself  and  works  teleologieally.  Especially  in  ethics  does 
the  importance  of  design,  purposive  action,  hecome  evident. 


202     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

Is  man  wholly  subject  to  nature,  or  can  he  subject  nature 
to  his  purposes  ? 

Many  of  the  most  perplexiny  questions  of  the  day  are 
involved  in  this  division,  such  as  the  freedom  of  the  will. 
The  beginner  cannot  hope  to  solve  these  hastily,  nor  need 
he  cease  his  sociological  investigations  until  they  are  solved. 
Aside  from  these  problems  in  or  near  the  realm  of  the 
unknowable,  he  will  find  many  others  which  are  solvable 
and  of  inestimable  importance. 

The  definite  probleyn  is :  Wliat  ought  society  to  he,  and 
how  can  it  be  made  what  it  ought  to  be  ? 

Having  now  the  principles  of  society  per  se,  showing 
what  must  be  in  order  that  society  may  be,  and  the 
evolution  of  these  principles,  showing  what  society  has 
become  through  the  process  of  actual  development,  only 
what  society  ought  to  be  remains  to  be  considered.  The 
first  division  gives  the  most  general  idea  of  society, 
what  is  characteristic  of  all  association,  what  the  social 
structure  is,  what  forces  constitute  it,  how  they  interact, 
and  what  potentiality  they  involve  ;  the  second  traces  the 
working  of  the  principles  in  history  as  they  produce 
actual  society ;  our  third  division,  sociological  ethics, 
treats  of  what  the  social  forces  ought  to  become,  what 
their  interaction  should  be,  and  how  the  most  perfect 
society  can  be  evolved.  By  considering  what  must  be, 
what  has  been,  and  what  ought  to  be,  completeness  is 
given  to  sociological  inquiry,  including  all  departments 
of  social  knowledge.  So  far  as  prevision  is  concerned, 
which  has  a  special  significance  for  ethics,  we  treat  it 
here  as  an  inference  from  our  second  division,  under 
which  it  is  discussed. 

If  a  planet  moves  in  an  imperfect  ellipse,  it  may  be  a 
legitimate  problem  for  an  astronomer  to  inquire  into  the 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  203 

conditions  necessary  to  make  the  ellipse  perfect.     If  a 
chemist   fails   to  find  an  element  in  its  pure  form  in 
nature,  he  seeks  to  produce  it  artificially.     We  try  to 
get  rid  of  bacteria  from  the  air  we  breathe  and  the  food 
we  eat ;  cities  spend  vast  sums  to  secure  pure  drinking 
water;   houses,  ships,  and  furniture  are  disinfected  in 
order  to  destroy  the  germs  of  contagious  diseases.     Our 
whole  medical  system  is  based  on  the  theory  that  ills 
can  be  removed  and  health  promoted.     Empiricism  has 
prevailed  extensively  in  medicine  ;  yet  if  some  shallow 
empiric    were    to    charge    the    medical    faculty    with 
inconsistency  for  trying  to  promote  health  while  they 
never  have  specimens  of  perfect  health  to  examine,  they 
would  ansvv^er  that  they  study  diseased  humanity  for  the 
sake  of  health.     If  the  objector  replied  that  after  study- 
ing diseases  their  work  was  done,  because  there  are  no 
facts  of  perfect  health  to  investigate,  they  would  likely 
deem    no    further    controversy    necessary.     Helmholtz 
found  only  imperfect  eyes ;  but  he  knew  that  they  were 
imperfect  only  because  he  had  an  idea  of  what  a  perfect 
eye  is.     The  wise  teacher  considers  the  ignorance  and 
errors  of  his  pupils  in  order  to  remove  them. 

The  bearing  of  these  facts  on  our  subject  is  clear. 
We  have  the  foundation  and  the  historic  superstructure 
of  society  in  the  other  two  divisions.  As  we  contem- 
plate that  superstructure  we  aim  at  its  explanation.  Its 
genesis  explains  only  liow  it  became  what  it  is.  But 
you  must  eliminate  reason  from  the  mind  to  stop  with 
that.  Neither  Darwin  nor  the  scientific  gardener  or 
bird  fancier  ends  his  inquiries  with  the  origin  of  spe- 
cies ;  that  is  but  preliminary  to  the  problem  what  can 
be  made  of  the  existing  flora  and  fauna.  But  if  the 
question  of  progress  toward  perfection  is  legitimate 
respecting  plants  and  animals,  in  scientific  inquiry,  shall 


204     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

it  be  pronounced   unscientific  respecting  man  and  his 
associations  ? 

The  student  who  masters  sociological  problems  will 
have  revelations  respecting  the  status  attained  by  social 
science  when  he  discovers  that  it  is  necessary  to  justify 
the  inclusion   of  ethics  in  Sociology. 

When  Comte  insists  on  making  Sociology  a  positive 
science  in  the  same  sense  as  physics,  it  may  be  ques- 
tioned whether  there  is  room  in  it  for  ethics.     The  claim 
that  science  involves  a  strict  adherence  to  phenomena 
would    make  the  historic  method   the  only   valid   one. 
But  if  we  go  to  the  historic  data  for  the  sake  of  draw- 
ing a  social  science  from  them,  it  does  not  appear  why 
we  may  not  draw  ethics  from  them  likewise.     If  it  is 
argued  that  ethics  is  not  found  on  the  surface  of  the 
facts,  we  answer,  neither  is  science  found  there.     The 
trend  to  unify  knowledge  by  putting  it  in  the  form  of 
science  is  not  a  whit  less  rational,  a  going  beyond  the 
mere  facts,  than  is  the  construction  of  a  system  of  eth- 
ics.    Hence  Comte,  instead  of  limiting  his  inquiries  to 
social  phenomena,  often  leaves  the  impression  that  he 
values  them  for  the  sake  of  the  ethical  factors  involved 
in  them.     He  discusses  morals  and  morality,  the  con- 
ditions of  progress  and  the  welfare  of  society,  treating 
the  perfection  of  humanity  as  the  aim  of  social  devel- 
opment, and  his  positive  method,  as  distinct  from  the 
theological  and   metaphysical,  as  the  ideal   process  for 
the  accomplishment  of  the  ethical  aim.     This  emphasis 
on  ethics  is  to  his  credit;  it  may  be  the  product  in  part 
of  his  former  relation  to  Saint-Simon,  with  his  social- 
istic  measures.     Practical    considerations   gave    Comte 
the  impulse   to  sociological  inquiries,  and   his  system 
terminates  in  ethics.     If  this  conflicts  with  his  positiv- 
istic  philosophy,  so  much  the  worse  for  that  philosophy. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  205 

To  discuss  associated  liumanity  and  leave  out  ethics,  is 
like  a  theology  of  the  Olympian  gods  without  Zeus.^ 

The  special  social  sciences  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
place  of  ethics.  The  system  of  ethics  is  itself  rapidly  be- 
coming a  social  science  ;  how  shall  Sociology  treat  that 
science  if  it  has  no  place  for  ethics  ?  Since  the  days 
of  Savigny  the  laws  of  the  state  have  been  treated  his- 
torically. But  this  has  not  done  away  with  their 
rational  consideration.  What  they  are  and  how  they 
became  what  they  are  does  not  eliminate  the  question 
of  what  they  should  be.  Jurisprudence  is  largely  ethi- 
cal and  deals  with  what  ought  to  be.  We  know  crimes 
only  because  they  fall  below  the  moral  standard.  Every 
lawyer,  unless  a  mere  pettifogger,  has  ideals  of  right. 
Political  science  deals  with  history  and  with  present 
actuality,  but  also  with  rational  ideals.  The  true  states- 
man stands  on  reality,  but  reaches  out  toward  ideals 
of  the  state.  In  economies  the  historical  method  has 
been  made  prominent  during  the  last  half-century,  but 
it  is  essentially  a  system  of  rational  principles,  or  aims 
to  be,  no  matter  how  men  may  act  in  their  industrial 
pursuits. 

The  man  who  limits  Sociology  to  social  phenomena 
has  no  voice  in  sociological  ethics.  The  facts  to  which 
he  limits  himself  say  nothing  on  the  subject.  Whoever 
says  that  ethics  oiigld  to  be  excluded  from  Sociology, 
has  already  admitted  the  ought  as  a  legitimate  object  of 
inquiry.  If  he  has  an  ideal  of  Sociology  which  excludes 
ethics,  how  can  he  claim  that  Sociology  is  limited  to 
social  facts  and  the  historic  method,  and  therefore  has 
nothing  to  do  with  ideals  ? 

1  Let  any  one  read  what  Comte  says  of  ethical  factors  under  the  head 
of  Social  Physics  if  he  wants  to  learn  what  prominence  is  given  to  eth- 
ical subjects  in  the  Positive  Philosophy. 


206     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

In  claiming  ethics  as  inherent  in  Sociology,  we  of 
course  regard  Sociology  as  more  than  a  "  descriptive  " 
science.  That  this  is  a  misnomer  has  already  been  shown. 
Science  is  rational,  not  less,  but  the  more  so,  because  it 
strictly  adheres  to  facts  as  its  data.  Only  an  irrational 
exclusion  of  thinking  from  phenomena  can  prevent  the 
inclusion  of  sociological  ethics  in  the  social  science. 

Mr.  Spencer  is  more  guarded  than  Comte ;  but  one 
need  only  look  at  the  close  of  his  third  volume  of 
"  Principles "  to  see  that  he  cannot  avoid  ethical  con- 
siderations. These  are  involved  in  his  discussion  of 
individualism  and  socialism,  as  well  as  of  other  subjects. 

Mr.  Giddings'  position  may  seem  to  exclude  sociologi- 
cal ethics.  When  he  defines  Sociology  as  "  an  expla- 
nation of  social  phenomena  in  terms  of  natural 
causation,"  he  makes  this  more  specific  by  saying, 
"  Sociology  is  an  interpretation  of  social  phenomena  in 
terms  of  psychical  activity,  organic  adjustment,  natural 
selection,  and  the  conservation  of  energy."  ^  But  in 
spite  of  the  a  priori  reduction  of  "•  psychical  activity " 
to  "  natural  causation,"  his  definition  does  not  exclude 
ethics.  The  "  psychical  activity "  constantly  deals 
with  ethical  factors.  Hence  we  find  on  the  next  two 
pages  that  an  "  end  "  of  society  is  recognized,  and  also 
an  "  ideal."  "  The  function  of  society  is  to  develop 
conscious  life  and  to  create  human  personality ;  and  to 
that  end  it  now  exists.  It  is  conscious  association  with 
his  fellows  that  develops  man's  moral  nature.  .  .  .  Ac- 
cordingly, we  may  say  that  the  function  of  social  or- 
ganization, which  the  sociologist  must  always  keep  in 
view,  is  the  evolution  of  the  personality  through  ever 
higher  stages  until  it  attains  to  the  ideal  that  we  name 
humanity." 

J  rriiic'ij)lcs  of  Sociulugy,  419. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  207 

In  makiug  a  separate  division  of  sociological  ethics 
we  simply  propose  to  treat  systematically  an  essential 
factor  in  Sociology  which  is  now  so  generally  treated 
casually  and  in  a  desultory  manner.  Sociology  is 
"  strictly  an  explanatory  science,"  as  Mr.  Giddings  says, 
and  so  we  propose  to  resort  to  all  legitimate  means  for 
explaining  the  ethics  of  society.  When  we  are  informed 
that  society  has  a  "  function,"  an  "  end,"  an  "  ideal," 
and  that  it  develops  "  man's  moral  nature,"  we  take  the 
statements  seriously.  These  are  the  very  things  with 
which  sociological  ethics  is  concerned,  and  we  ask  for 
nothing  more  than  to  be  permitted  to  treat  these  sub- 
jects scientifically. 

In  sociological  ethics  we  deal  with  the  social  ideal  and 
the  means  of  its  realization.  When  we  have  found  the 
standard  of  what  society  ought  to  be,  we  can  make  it 
the  measure  of  past  attainments.  Historians  constantly 
apply  their  ideals  as  tests  of  men  and  measures.  In- 
justice may  of  course  be  done  personalities  and  institu- 
tions of  the  past  if  judged  by  our  age  instead  of  their 
own.  Care  must  be  taken  not  to  attribute  to  them  our 
own  ideal.  The  chief  value  of  sociological  ethics,  how- 
ever, consists  in  the  fact  that  it  not  merely  gives  us  a 
test  of  society,  but  also  becomes  our  guide  in  social 
action.  We  take  ethics  here  in  its  broadest  sense,  in- 
volving all  the  interests  and  the  total  welfare  of  society. 
Instead  of  confining  it  to  morals  in  a  narrow  sense,  we 
include  in  it  all  that  pertains  to  association,  such  as 
education,  the  industries,  politics,  and  the  other  factors 
which  apply  to  social  well-being.  It  is  our  aim  to  dis- 
cover the  principles  and  laws  of  social  progress. 

Discussions  of  ethical  elements  in  society  abound,  but 
we  have  no  sociological  ethics ;  that  is,  we  have  no 
ethics  as  a  component  part  of  Sociology,  so  organically 


208     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

related  to  the  other  two  divisions  as  to  form  a  complete 
sociological  system.  We  distinguish  between  social 
ethics  and  sociological  ethics  ;  the  former  is  a  social 
science,  the  latter  an  integral  part  of  the  social  science  ; 
the  former  is  a  system  by  itself  and  can  enter  into  social 
details ;  the  latter  confines  itself  to  general  ethical  prin- 
ciples, and  considers  these  not  by  themselves,  but  in 
their  relation  to  all  the  other  social  forces.  Social  ethics 
treats  the  ethical  factor  as  abstracted,  isolated  from  the 
other  social  factors  ;  in  sociological  ethics,  however,  the 
ethical  factor  is  treated  in  connection  with  all  the  other 
factors  in  the  social  organism.  In  the  one  case,  then, 
we  look  for  social  ethical  abstraction,  isolation,  detail ; 
in  the  other,  for  what  is  inherent  in  the  organism  and 
general.  The  two  have  a  common  ground  in  principles  ; 
but  it  is  peculiar  to  sociological  ethics  that  the  correla- 
tion of  ethics  to  the  total  factors  of  the  social  organism 
is  considered ;  and  in  social  ethics  it  is  peculiar  to  con- 
sider ethical  details  of  societies,  which  are  omitted  in 
sociological  ethics. 

The  sense  in  which  we  use  sociological  ethics  is  easily 
apprehended.  Social  ethics  proposes  to  give  a  system 
of  social  morality  ;  in  sociological  ethics  we  aim  to  give 
the  principles  of  social  progress.  The  view  thus  taken 
in  sociological  ethics  is  thoroughly  ethical,  considering 
what  ought  to  be,  in  distinction  from  what  must  be  and 
from  what  has  been,  in  order  that  the  utmost  social 
progress  may  be  promoted.^ 

^  In  sociological  ethics,  as  in  the  other  two  divisions,  society  is  viewed 
as  an  organism.  In  other  words,  nothing  in  society  is  treated  as  isolated, 
but  as  in  organic  connection  with  all  the  other  social  factors.  In  the  social 
relations  the  dominance  of  ethics  is  to  be  established.  This  cannot  be 
done  by  separating  the  ethical  factor  from  the  other  social  forces  and  de- 
veloping it  l)y  itself,  but  only  by  correlating  it  with  the  other  forces  as  sub- 
ordinate to  it  and  as  subservient  to  ethical  principles. 

It  has  already  been  sliown  tliat  religion  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  of 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  209 

In  some  respects  our  third  division  is  more  difficult 
than  the  other  two,  and  certainly  not  less  important. 
Indeed,  the  majority  of  social  investigators  are  apt  to 
regard  the  otlier  divisions  valuable  in  proportion  as  they 
culminate  in  the  third  and  promote  social  development. 
We  must  go  to  society  per  se  and  to  its  historical  evolu- 
tion in  order  to  determine  what  is  required  for  future 
progress.  We  cannot  use  the  forces  at  work  in  society 
unless  we  understand  their  nature  and  operations  ;  so 
the  actuality  of  society  must  be  studied  in  order  to  learn 
what  is  still  required.  The  social  worker,  no  less  than 
the  artist,  must  understand  the  nature  of  the  material 
he  is  intent  on  shaping  into  his  ideal. 

Social  reforms  are  in  the  air ;  earnest  workers  think 
that  these  reforms  absorb  the  mission  of  the  age.  Many 
of  the  reformatoiy  efforts,  hasty  and  shallow,  are  in 
danger  of  retarding  the  progress  they  seek  to  promote. 
The  work  itself  rests  on  a  false  basis,  the  means  are  in- 
adequate, and  the  very  names  of  reforms  and  reformers 
are  liable  to  become  a  byword  and  reproach.  The  deep 
and  difficvilt  work  demanded  requires  more  than  good 
intentions  and  an  altruistic  impulse.  It  is  the  purpose 
of  our  discipline  to  transform  the  altruistic  impulse  into 
rational  and  permanent  purpose. 

Our  age  has  developed  a  mania  for  the  exposure  of 
social  ills.  Criticism  of  the  most  radical  kind  goes  hand 
in   hand   with   negation   and   destruction.      "  After   us 

the  social  forces.  Its  connection  with  ethics  is  peculiarly  intimate.  Al- 
though religion  primarily  indicates  the  relation  between  God  and  man, 
it  may  also  exert  the  strongest  influence  on  the  relation  of  man  to  man. 
The  latter  relation  is  here  viewed  as  predominantly  ethical.  The  unpar- 
alleled ethical  principles  of  the  New  Testament  are  indissolubly  connected 
witli  the  religious  teachings.  In  various  places,  most  elaborately  in  1  Cor. 
xii.,  the  figure  of  the  body  and  its  members  sliows  that  the  ideal  of  Chris- 
tian society  is  a  ])erfect  social  organism,  the  very  thing  aimed  at  in  socio- 
logical ethics. 

14 


210     INTRODUCTION^   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  deluge,"  say  the  apostles  of  annihilation ;  and  they 
care  not  when  the  waters  shall  subside  and  the  green 
earth  appear  again.  No  wonder  that,  when  all  the 
energies  are  exhausted  in  efforts  at  destruction,  none  are 
left  for  construction.  Yet  if  the  destructive  forces  are 
to  be  beneficial,  the  positive,  edifying  ones  must  be  con- 
nected with  them.  The  best  destruction  may  be  by 
construction,  just  as  disease  is  destroyed  by  promoting 
health,  and  darkness  vanishes  by  letting  in  the  light. 
Where  truth  enters,  error  is  doomed.  Evolution  may 
work  the  most  thorough  revolution,  just  as  education 
overthrows  ignorance.  Root  out  an  evil  merely,  and  the 
briers  may  flourish  more  luxuriantly  than  ever ;  but 
plant  a  good  tree  in  its  place  and  no  room  will  be  left 
for  evil  to  strike  root.  Regenerative  forces  are  required  ; 
but  how  shall  they  be  secured  ?  Speculation  may  help 
us  ;  it  must,  however,  be  supplemented  by  an  investiga- 
tion of  past  remedial  agencies,  the  method  of  their  appli- 
cation and  the  manner  of  their  working,  the  power  of 
the  individual  and  of  collective  action,  the  value  of 
education,  of  religion,  morals,  the  family,  the  church, 
the  state,  and  other  institutions  and  organizations. 

It  is  important  to  distinguish  between  what  is  desir- 
able and  possible.  That  we  cherish  ideals  in  ethics  does 
not  imply  that  we  deem  perfection  attainable.  It  is  a 
goal  toward  which  progress  moves.  Carlyle  is  right : 
"  Alas !  we  know  that  ideals  can  never  be  completely 
embodied  in  practice.  Ideals  must  ever  lie  a  great  way 
off,  —  and  we  will  thankfully  content  ourselves  with  any 
not  intolerable  approximation  thereto."  Not  less  true  is 
it  that  the  ideal  is  the  ultimate  goal  of  ethical  action 
and  the  strongest  impulse  to  moral  purpose. 

Men  who  consider  only  what  is  desirable  are  apt  to 
become   visionary   and   to   attain    no   practical    results. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  211 

Progress  is  gradual ;  and  \vc  must  start  from  what  lias 
been  attained  in  order  wisely  to  take  the  next  step  for- 
ward. We  cannot  do  to-morrow's  work  to-day.  Tiie 
effective  ethical  idealism  is  tlius  also  the  strictest  ethical 
realism.  Where  shall  we  get  our  seeds  for  future  sow- 
ing, except  from  the  harvests  of  the  past  ? 

Among  the  most  important  distinctions  in  social  work 
is  that  between  a  temporary  removal  of  ills  and  a  per- 
manent cure.  It  is  one  thhig  to  save  a  few  drunkards, 
and  another  to  remove  the  causes  of  intemperance.  So 
with  poverty,  with  strikes,  and  all  the  evils  of  the  day  ; 
momentary  relief  must  be  distinguished  from  permanent 
remedy.  Certain  influences  are  thus  found  to  have  their 
day,  while  others  abide  ;  it  is  those  that  are  permanent 
which  necessarily  have  the  greatest  value.  This  gives  a 
definite  aim  to  ethics  ;  whatever  temporary  relief  may 
be  furnished,  the  ultimate  aim  should  always  be  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  purest  continuous  social  environment 
and  the  best  permanent  institutions.  These  things 
abide,  while  the  individual  passes  away.  Thus  an  im- 
provement in  language,  in  literature,  in  education,  in  the 
family  relation,  in  the  state  and  civic  institutions,  and  in 
other  lasting  social  arrangements,  influences  whole  gen- 
erations and  may  abide  as  long  as  time  itself.  It  is  for 
this  reason  that  the  great  benefactors  of  humanity  have 
established  new  or  improved  principles,  have  corrected 
theories  and  purified  systems,  and  have  founded  institu- 
tions of  lasting  benefit  to  society. 

We  cannot  enter  into  an  elaborate  discussion  of  what 
is  included  in  sociological  ethics.  It  will  be  an  advan- 
tage to  consider  ethical  questions  in  the  light  of  the  prog- 
ress of  humanity  itself,  and  equally  so  to  view  all  social 
action  from  the  sociological  standpoint,  instead  of  treat- 
ing each  social  force  as  abstracted  and  isolated.     The 


212     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

principles  of  the  great  social  problem,  of  the  burning 
questions  of  the  day,  of  socialism,  communism,  an- 
archism, all  find  their  place  in  this  division.  Social 
rights  and  social  duties,  liberty,  equality,  fraternity,  are 
involved. 

Social  progress  must  necessarily  be  slow  and  imper- 
fect so  long  as  the  old  method  of  considering  the  in- 
dividuals of  society  as  the  ultimate  social  analysis 
continues.  How  can  we  expect  the  social  forces  to  be 
properly  understood  and  used  to  the  best  advantage  be- 
fore we  discover  them  in  the  personality  and  distinguish 
them  from  what  remains  individual  and  private  in  that 
])ersonality  ?  Our  greatest  hope  of  progress  consists  in 
concentrating  attention  and  effort  on  these  social  forces, 
in  sharply  distinguishing  them  from  what  remains  pri- 
vate in  the  individual,  and  in  properly  developing  their 
power,  their  interaction,  and  their  results,  the  associa- 
tions. It  is  only  by  mastering  these  social  forces  that 
the  sociologist  gets  control  of  i\\Q  powers  by  means  of 
which  social  progress  is  accomplished. 

For  social  development  we  need  to  win  the  social  per- 
sonalities ;  but  so  long  as  individuals  are  regarded  as 
composing  society,  these  personalities  need  no  longer  be 
won,  for  society  already  has  them.  Let  it,  however,  be 
recognized  that  society  has  not  the  individual,  but  only 
a  fraction  of  him,  much  remaining  unpossessed  of  what 
is  really  social ;  then  a  new  purpose  respecting  him  will 
be  created.  It  will  thenceforth  become  tlie  aim  to  make 
social  all  he  now  ignorantly  or  fraudulently  withholds 
from  society.  Education,  ethics,  the  law  of  the  land, 
and  religion  will  make  it  their  mission  to  make  a  social 
conquest  of  the  social  personality. 

The  social  organism  will  also  be  better  understood. 
Its  true  nature  being  known,  the  energies  can  be  more 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  213 

wisely  directed  to  its  development.  The  economic, 
political,  and  religious  forces  can  be  studied  as  organi- 
cally united,  as  constantly  interacting.  It  will  become 
evident  that^  to  treat  them  as  isolated  or  as  abstractions 
is  a  perversion.  By  thus  concentrating  attention  on  the 
actual  social  energies,  a  knowledge  and  control  of  them, 
such  as  has  heretofore  been  in  vain  sought,  may  be  ex- 
pected. We  have  a  right  to  look  for  greater  success 
when  we  cease  handling  merely  the  rough  ore  as  it  comes 
from  the  mountain,  having  learned  the  art  of  extracting 
the  iron  from  it  and  using  that  only  for  our  social  ends. 

The  most  varied  application  of  this  study  of  the  social 
energies  can  be  made  to  all  social  forms  and  institu- 
tions. When  we  have  learned  what  particular  forces 
constitute  a  society,  we  can  inquire  how  they  ought  to 
work.  We  know  that  economic  forces  control  indus- 
trial associations;  and  we  know  also  that  these  asso- 
ciations need  ethical  forces.  An  institution  which  is 
a  concentration  of  various  forces  sometimes  needs  to 
make  dominant  a  force  now  subordinate;  thus  many  a 
state  would  be  transformed  if  it  made  the  highest  inter- 
ests, instead  of  the  lower,  supreme,  and  if  the  energy 
of  statesmanship  dominated  over  the  Philistine  forces 
of  degraded  politicians.  Thus  ever}'  social  group  and 
institution  can  be  tested  by  its  social  forces,  and  progress 
will  consist  in  developing  the  forces,  in  adding  new  ones, 
or  in  changing  the  relative  dominance  of  the  forces. 

The  emphasis  we  place  on  the  permanent  social  ener- 
gies does  not  mean  that  the  persons  who  are  in  society 
are  underestimated.  These  persons  receive  the  benefit 
of  the  enduring  forces.  Each  generation  begins  its 
work  at  the  beginning,  with  such  advantages  as  are 
conferred  by  heredity  and  by  the  social  accumulations 
of  culture.     The  children  do  not  begin  in  intellect  and 


214     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

morals  where  their  fathers  ended ;  but  they  must  achieve 
their  own  intellectuality  and  morality  amid  the  treas- 
ures of  past  evolutions.  Intellect  and  ethics  are  not 
pushed  on  from  generation  to  generation,  as  money  and 
land  are  transmitted ;  but  the  conditions  for  intellectual 
and  moral  development  are  given ;  and  as  these  condi- 
tions vary  with  the  ages,  so  do  the  opportunities  of 
society  and  individuals.  What  shall  be  made  of  these 
opportunities  depends  on  persons  themselves.  Just  as 
diseases  are  contagious  but  not  health,  so  what  is  worst 
in  an  age  may  be  absorbed  while  what  is  best  is  missed. 
Not  by  unconscious  absorption,  but  only  by  personal 
energy  can  reason  and  ethics  be  made  supreme. 

By  permanent  social  forces  we  mean  such  as  are  in 
persons  and  their  environment,  but  work  so  constantly 
as  not  to  be  affected  by  the  passing  away  of  individuals. 
They  continue  because  embodied  in  social  institutions 
which  endure  from  generation  to  generation  and  mould 
the  generations  themselves. 

In  making  a  special  division  of  sociological  ethics  our 
subject  is  lifted  out  of  the  ordinary  processes  of  natural 
law.  Ethical  considerations  are  based  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  man  is  not  resistlessly  pushed  forward  by  phys- 
ical causes,  but  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  he  can  set 
a  goal  for  himself  toward  which  to  move.  He  can  re- 
sist the  operation  of  particular  forces,  choose  the  end 
for  which  he  will  live,  and  bend  all  his  energies  toward 
the  attainment  of  that  end.  Whoever  appreciates  the 
value  of  teleological  action  knows  its  superiority  to  the 
vulgar  conception  of  life  as  a  mere  struggle  for  exist- 
ence, in  which  the  survival  of  what  is  called  the  fit- 
test is  the  result.  Even  when  life  means  more  than 
existence,  when  it  includes  what  is  commonly  called 
well-being,  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  life  itself  is 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  215 

necessarily  the  end  of  existence.  Those  whose  con- 
ception is  most  exalted  are  inclined  to  regard  life  as 
not  an  end  in  itself,  but  as  means  to  an  end.  Thus  life 
is  estimated  for  what  of  truth  and  beauty  and  goodness 
it  can  appropriate  and  advance.  Those  who  live  for  an 
idea  subordinate  life  to  it ;  and  they  prefer  to  adhere  to 
that  idea  and  let  life  go,  rather  than  retain  life  and  lose 
the  idea. 

So  prominent  has  the  contemplation  of  natural  law 
and  of  historic  processes  as  the  working  of  this  law 
become,  that  for  some  the  teleological  view  hardly  ex- 
ists. Social  evolution  for  them  is  a  vegetative  process, 
with  whose  course  rational  choice  and  voluntary  pur- 
pose have  little  or  nothing  to  do.  For  such  our  third 
division  does  not  constitute  an  integral  part  of  Soci- 
ology. Yet  deliberate  purpose  has  had  much  to  do  with 
social  development  in  the  past,  and  it  will  increase  its 
force  in  proportion  as  social  advance  is  made  in  the 
future.  While  purposive  action  has  heretofore  been  so 
largely  confined  to  individual  ends,  we  have  a  right  to 
expect  that  it  will  be  more  and  more  directed  to  social 
ends  as  Sociology  distinguishes  the  social  from  the  pri- 
vate forces,  as  society  itself  gains  in  prominence,  as 
altruism  takes  the  place  of  selfishness,  and  as  social 
progress  is  studied  and  appreciated.  It  has  been  said 
that  with  his  purposes  a  man  himself  grows ;  and  with 
the  dominance  of  social  themes  as  never  before,  with 
the  advance  of  sociological  study,  and  with  the  steady 
increase  of  social  interests,  we  have  a  right  to  expect 
the  growth  of  the  social  personality  at  the  expense  of 
the  selfish  personality,  and  a  corresponding  growth  of 
effort  in  behalf  of  social  welfare. 

As  a  practical  division  of  our  subject  the  following 
classification  will  help  the   beginner. 


216     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

1.    The    Ethical   Ideal. 

This  involves  the  question  of  the  ultimate  aim  in 
social  action.  Suppose  that  we  could  at  once  transform 
it,  what  should  Ave  make  society  ?  Is  the  individual  the 
ultimate  aim,  or  some  organization  or  institution,  as 
the  family,  the  church,  the  state;  or  is  it  humanity,  or 
humanity  in  its  associated  capacity  ? 

It  is  quite  common  to  regard  individual  welfare  as  the 
ultimate  aim.  To  those  who  regard  individuals  as  the 
constituent  elements  of  society,  such  a  conception  is  not 
surprising.  They  think  individual  feeling  is  to  be  pro- 
moted, the  feeling  of  pleasure,  happiness.  Such  an  end, 
however,  arouses  serious  doubt.  The  feeling  of  pleasure 
is  so  subjective,  depending  on  so  many  peculiar  individual 
conditions,  that  it  is  hardly  conceivable  how  so  subjective 
and  variable  an  object  can  be  the  aim  of  all  social  action. 
What  gives  one  pleasure  causes  pain  in  another.  J.  S. 
Mill,  in  his  "Autobiography,"  assures  us  that  experience 
taught  him  that  personal  happiness  is  missed,  or  apt  to  be 
missed,  when  made  the  direct  aim  of  life,  that  it  is  more 
sure  of  being  secured  if  some  other  purpose  is  chosen  as 
the  object  of  life,  when  pleasure  comes  in  incidentally, 
of  itself.^ 

1  The  interesting  passage,  contained  in  Chapter  V.,  is  as  follows  :  "  I 
never,  indeed  wavered  in  the  conviction  that  liappiuess  is  the  test  of  all 
'rules  of  conduct  and  the  end  of  life.  But  I  now  thought  tliat  this  end  was 
only  to  he  attained  by  not  making  it  tlie  (h'rect  end.  Those  only  are  happy 
(I  thought)  wlio  have  their  minds  fixed  on  sonic  object  other  than  their 
own  happiness ;  on  the  haj)piness  of  others,  on  the  improvement  of  man- 
kind, even  on  some  art  or  pursuit,  followed  not  as  a  means,  but  as  itself  an 
ideal  end.  Aiming  thus  at  something  else,  they  find  happiness  by  the 
way.  The  enjoyments  of  life  (such  was  now  my  theory)  are  sufficient  to 
make  it  a  pleasant  thing,  when  they  are  taken  en  passant,  without  being 
made  a  principal  object.  Once  make  them  so,  and  they  are  immediately 
felt  to  be  inefficient.  They  will  not  bear  a  scrutinizing  examination.  Ask 
yourself  whether  you  are  happy,  and  you  cease  to  be  so.  The  only  chance 
is  to  treat,  not  happiues.s,  but  some  end  external  to  it,  as  the  purpose  of 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  217 

Those  who  regard  pleasure  as  necessarily  the  aim  of 
life  make  a  serious  mistake.  They  forget  that  the 
reason  can  select  an  aim,  say  truth,  not  because  it 
affords  pleasure,  but  because  it  is  the  truth.  The  man, 
indeed,  chooses  it  because  he  values  it  most  highly,  but 
he  values  it  most  highly  because  it  is  the  truth,  not 
because  it  affords  most  pleasure.  The  mind  has  the 
power  of  abstracting  the  truth  from  all  considerations  of 
pleasure,  and  of  choosing  it  for  its  own  sake,  regardless 
of  the  pleasure  or  pain  the  choice  involves. 

Another  and  still  more  serious  objection  arises  when 
we  make  individual  happiness  the  aim  and  end  of  social 
progress.  So  long  as  only  individuals  were  seen  in 
society,  no  other  definite  object  could  well  be  presented 
as  the  social  aim.  Society  consisting  of  individuals,  their 
welfare  meant  the  welfare  of  society.  But  now  we  have 
society  without  absorbing  in  it  the  individuals,  and 
therefore  we  are  able  to  make  social  progress  itself  the 
social  aim.  It  need  hardly  be  said  that  we  do  not  abstract 
this  social  progress  from  the  individuals  in  society. 

We  ought  to  expect  the  end  of  social  progress  to  be 
the  perfection  of  society  itself,  not  the  feeling  of  an  in- 
dividual, who  is  only  in  part  in  society  as  a  social  per- 

life.  Let  your  self-cousciousness,  your  scrutiny,  your  self-interrogatiou, 
exhaust  themselves  on  that;  and  if  otherwise  fortunately  circumstanced 
you  will  inhale  happiness  with  the  air  you  breathe,  without  dwelling  on  it, 
or  thinking  about  it,  without  either  forestalling  it  in  imagination,  or  put- 
ting it  to  flight  by  fatal  (juestioning.  This  theory  now  became  the  basis  of 
my  philosophy  of  life.  And  I  still  hold  to  it  as  the  best  theory  for  all 
those  who  have  but  a  moderate  degree  of  sensibility  and  of  capacity  for 
enjoyment,  that  is,  for  the  great  majority  of  mankind." 

We  may  well  wonder  whether,  if  personal  happiness  is  missed  whea 
made  the  direct  aim  of  the  individual,  happiness  is  not  also  likely  to  be 
missed  if  made  the  aim  of  society.  If  individual  happiness  is  felt  to  be 
insufficient  when  made  the  personal  aim,  must  it  not  be  still  more  so  if 
made  the  social  aim?  The  logic  of  the  passage  is  against  the  choice  of 
happiness  as  in  any  case  the  end  of  life. 


218     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

sonality.  The  well-being  of  society  as  the  end  to  be 
attained  by  social  progress  means  that  the  social  forces 
are  to  be  made  as  perfect  as  possible ;  that  all  of  the 
individual  belonging  to  society  be  given  to  society ;  that 
the  interaction  of  the  social  forces  be  made  healthy  ;  and 
that  the  sopieties  formed  by  this  interaction  be  complete 
in  themselves  and  rightly  related  to  one  another.  The 
perfection  of  society  is  thus  the  ethical  aim  of  society. 

It  is  beyond  question  that  such  a  social  state  will  have 
the  most  marked  effect  on  individuals.  Society  cannot 
make  them  happy ;  it  cannot  force  their  subjective  state 
into  happiness.  But  while  leaving  to  individuals  what 
belongs  to  them,  society  makes  the  very  conditions 
which  individual  welfare  requires.  Indeed,  since  the 
personality  in  which  the  private  and  social  forces  are  not 
absolutely  separated  acts  as  a  unit,  we  expect  the  per- 
fection of  the  private  forces  to  develop  toward  perfection 
parallel  with  the  individual's  social  forces.  A  perfect 
society  thus  involves  the  perfection  of  the  individual, 
though  that  society  itself  is  composed  only  of  the  social 
forces  of  individuals. 

Social  perfection,  then,  is  the  aim  of  social  progress. 
This  is  the  immediate  as  well  as  the  ultimate  aim,  with- 
out any  side-glances  at  this  or  that  effect  on  the  individ- 
ual. Only  when  it  considers  the  total  social  organism  is 
ethics  sociological. 

Under  this  general  aim  come  many  specific  purposes 
as  subordinate,  and  yet  all  contributory  to  the  same 
end.  Thus  we  are  called  on  to  deal  directly  with  con- 
crete evils  about  us.  So  vast  is  the  realm  of  social  needs 
that  our  severe  limitations  may  oblige  us  to  confine  our 
studies  and  work  to  special  departments.  The  stream 
of  social  progress  is  composed  of  many  tributaries,  and 
we  may  find  it  necessary  to  confine  ourselves  to  a  single 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETITICS.  219 

tributaiy.  Even  in  that  case  an  ideal  toward  which  to 
work  is  required.  Always  the  aim  is  the  best  sociation 
and  most  perfect  social  development.  Whatever  de- 
partment may  be  chosen  as  a  specialty,  it  should  not 
be  viewed  as  isolated,  but  as  an  integral  part  of  the 
social  organism. 

The  attention  is  naturally  concentrated  by  persons  on 
the  particular  social  groups  to  which  they  belong.  Each 
group  has  its  ideal ;  but  Sociology  is  concerned  about 
societies  as  parts  of  society.  Hence  its  aim  is  the  prog- 
ress of  society,  of  social  humanity,  and  of  societies  as 
its  constituent  elements.  There  is  to  be  no  one-sided  de- 
velopment of  a  particular  social  force  or  social  product, 
but  of  all  social  forces  and  products  together  and  har- 
moniously, of  the  social  organism  as  an  organism. 

As  already  intimated,  the  process  is  essentially  con- 
structive. When  our  age  has  been  pronounced  strong 
in  criticism  and  destruction,  but  weak  in  construction, 
the  charge  is  very  serious.  Destruction  may,  of  course, 
be  the  way  to  construction,  as  the  removal  of  rubbish 
prepares  the  way  for  the  foundation  of  a  building ;  but 
in  that  case  the  destruction  itself  aims  at,  and  ends  in, 
construction.  But  sometimes  destruction  itself  seems 
ultimate,  just  as  the  habit  of  war  may  lead  to  slaughter 
for  the  sake  of  slaughter.  Scholarship  may  become 
possessed  by  the  spirit  of  nihilism.  We  are  sure  that 
evils  can  best  be  overcome,  and  the  good  best  promoted, 
by  positive  and  constructive  efforts. 

The  ideal  of  social  progress,  therefore,  involves  such  a 
constructive  development  of  society  as  will  eliminate  the 
evils  by  unfolding  the  good.  With  economics  at  the 
foundation,  the  higher  interests  are  to  be  reared  on  it. 
Economics  as  the  beginning  and  end  of  society  cannot  bear 
the  light  of  reason.     Progress  develops  economics,  but 


220     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

builds  on  it  intellectuality  and  morality.  Progress  con- 
sists in  giving  the  supremacy  to  sociological  ethics,  indi- 
vidual and  social  ethics  being  its  ministers. 

2.    The  EtJiical  Actuality. 

One  thing  the  dominance  of  natural  science  has  im- 
pressed on  all  departments  of  thought :  the  value  of 
reality  and  the  importance  of  facts  as  its  interpreter. 
The  actuality  is  the  source  of  all  laws,  the  ground  of 
speculation,  and  the  basis  of  valid  systems.  There  is  a 
rigid  logic  in  social  progress  ;  it  must  not  only  start  with 
the  attainment  already  made,  but  likewise  be  adapted  to  it. 
Like  the  solution  of  a  proposition  in  geometry,  the  next 
step  in  ethics  can  be  taken  only  if  all  on  which  it  depends 
has  preceded.  All  improvement,  therefore,  like  educa- 
tion, depends  on  systematic  progress.  A  Roger  Bacon 
may  be  so  far  in  advance  of  his  age  that  he  leaves  little 
direct  impression  on  it,  except  that  he  was  in  league 
with  the  black  art ;  only  when  society  catches  up  with 
him  does  it  learn  the  lessons  he  tried  to  teach.  The 
social  actuality  must  be  known  in  order  that  there  may 
be  economy  of  effort,  no  attempt  being  made  to  do  again 
what  has  already  been  done ;  in  order  that  what  is  yet 
required  may  be  learned ;  in  order  that  the  social  factors 
to  be  moulded  and  developed  may  be  understood  ;  and  in 
order  that  the  next  social  step  which  logically  follows 
may  be  taken.  These  considerations  indicate  the  im- 
portance of  considering  thoroughly  the  social  actuality 
as  the  substance  to  be  shaped  into  the  social  ideal. 

Even  then  we  learn  that  but  an  imperfect  notion  of 
the  progress  actually  attained  by  humanity  is  within  our 
reach.  The  present  state  of  mankind  is  anything  but 
homogeneous.  An  infinite  variety  is  presented  by  the 
stages  of  development  from  barbarism  to  enlightenment 
which  now  exist.     However  confusing:  the  scene  when 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  221 

the  whole  of  humanity  is  viewed,  it  is  not  so  difficult  to 
obtain  a  conception  of  the  actuality  as  formed  in  a 
limited  sphere,  as  a  social  group,  a  community,  or  even  a 
state.  Such  a  conception  may  be  sufficient  for  the 
practical  purposes  toward  which  efforts  for  social  reform 
are  usually  directed. 

3.    The  Means  for  Realizing  the  Ideal  of  Progress. 

Definiteness  of  purpose  is  of  first  importance,  since 
that  determines  the  nature  and  direction  of  the  pro- 
gressive efforts.  There  can  be  no  rational  ethical  work 
in  behalf  of  society  without  keeping  in  view  the  end  to 
be  attained  and  the  actuality  to  be  transformed. 

In  sociological  ethics  we  never  lose  sight  of  the  fact 
that  society  itself,  the  total  social  organism,  is  to  be  de- 
veloped. Among  the  benefits  derived  from  the  study  of 
Sociology  is  the  comprehensive  view  it  gives  of  society 
as  inclusive  of  humanity.  This  enlarged  conception  en- 
ables each  one  to  appreciate  himself  as  related  not  merely 
to  his  family  and  immediate  social  environment,  but 
likewise  to  the  whole  of  mankind.  This  saves  the  indi- 
vidual from  a  false,  narrow  patriotism,  as  well  as  from 
degrading  selfishness.  With  this  enlarged  conception 
the  individual  is  enlarged  and  his  social  work  aug- 
mented in  point  of  importance.  This  comprehensive 
view,  which  embraces  humanity  as  the  aim  of  social 
progress,  does  not  interfere  with  ethical  effort  in  a 
limited  sphere.  Indeed,  it  is  through  specific  work  in  a 
particular  department  that  the  best  efforts  in  behalf  of 
humanity  are  likely  to  be  made.  But  however  specific 
the  work  and  limited  the  sphere,  it  is  to  be  inspired  by 
the  consciousness  that  it  is  for  the  entire  human  family. 

This  far-reaching  view  is  involved  in  the  very  concep- 
tion of  the  social  organism,  a  totality  with  which  all 
social  groups  are  in  vital  connection.     The  ethical  de- 


222     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

velopment  of  a  family,  a  voluntary  association,  or  the 
state,  is  the  progress  of  humanity  in  a  limited  sphere. 
In  all  progressive  movement  there  is  a  diffusive  power. 
Others  are  inspired  by  it  and  affected  by  its  contagious 
influence.  Thus  even  unconsciously  moral  views  and 
acts  are  promoted ;  still  more  will  they  be  advanced 
when  made  a  direct  aim  and  when  means  to  the  attain- 
ment of  the  end  are  adopted.  In  view  of  the  organic 
solidarity  of  humanity  no  course  of  any  of  its  factors  can 
be  indifferent. 

The  subject  is  too  large  for  adequate  discussion  here. 
Everywhere  the  aim  must  be  the  translation  of  the 
social  ideals  into  the  social  actuality.  Practically,  of 
course,  it  is  a  task  of  details ;  but  even  the  principles 
cannot  be  fully  considered  here.  The  development  of 
the  social  personality  as  a  specific  aim  in  education  ;  the 
perfection  of  existing  social  groups  and  organizations  ; 
the  evolution  of  the  state ;  the  creation  of  new  associa- 
tions to  meet  special  needs  ;  making  dominant  the  forces 
which  are  actually  supreme,  but  in  reality  subordinated : 
these  are  among  the  chief  aims.  A  deeper  investigation 
of  the  working  of  organizations  is  likewise  required. 
This  working  may  retard  as  well  as  promote  progress. 
An  idea  that  needs  organized  forces  for  its  promotion  is 
made  the  reason  for  association ;  but  long  after  that  idea 
has  received  the  deserved  recognition  and  the  age  has 
passed  beyond  it,  the  association  is  still  tethered  to  it. 
Thus  organizations  foster  a  conservatism  that  ends  in- 
quiry ;  they  stand  for  a  traditionalism  which  hinders 
progress  ;  and  existing  for  effete  and  stagnant  elements 
which  are  embodied  in  the  constitution,  they  fall  behind 
the  times  and  lose  their  original  mission.  It  therefore 
becomes  an  important  problem  how  far  organizations 
must  be    destroyed   or   revolutionized   for   the  sake  of 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  223 

social  progress,  and  how  far  new  organizations  are 
required. 

Among  the  most  important  topics  of  sociological  ethics 
is  the  perfecting  of  societies  for  the  sake  of  perfecting 
the  total  social  organism.  What  affects  the  parts  affects 
the  whole.  It  has  heen  suggested  that  what  individuals'" 
are  to  the  social  groups,  that  ought  the  states  to  be  to 
humanity.  Each  state  ouglit  to  be  an  ethical  leaven  for 
the  whole  human  family.  In  order  that  this  ideal  may 
even  in  a  small  measure  be  attained,  there  must  be  a  re- 
generation of  states.  So  are  they  now  devoured  by 
selfishness  that  they  behave  more  like  sharks  than  like 
constituent  parts  of  the  same  human  organism.  Might 
makes  right.  Colonization  likely  means  rapacity  and 
brutality.  Who  suspects  the  Concert  of  Powers  to  mean 
humanity  ?  And  what  humane  considerations  are  the 
inspiration  of  Jingoism  ? 

Frequently  the  civilizing  influence  of  the  enlightened 
states  is  accidental  rather  than  intentional.  The  knowl- 
edge and  laws  developed  for  home  purposes  are  com- 
municated to  others  and  may  prove  a  blessing  to  them  ; 
so  commerce  may  promote  civilization  in  some  measure, 
in  spite  of  the  evils  that  attend  it.  But  of  what  nation 
can  it  be  said  to-day  that  it  recognizes  itself  as  a  respon- 
sible member  of  the  great  social  organism,  and  its  mis- 
sion as  an  ethical  leaven  of  humanity  ?  Nations  can 
give  only  what  they  have  ;  what  then  is  the  character  of 
their  ethical  influence  ? 

At  a  time  when  extreme  communistic  views  threaten 
to  lose  the  individual  in  the  mass,  it  is  no  less  important 
to  consider  the  relation  of  the  personality  to  social  prog- 
ress. So  great  an  emphasis  may  be  placed  on  organized 
effort  as  to  attract  attention  away  from  personal  respon- 
sibility for  social  welfare.     Much  will  be  gained  when 


224     INTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  individual  discovers  that  a  proper  regard  for  self  in- 
volves a  proper  regard  for  society.  Selfishness  is  the 
death  of  sociality  ;  but  a  true  self-regard  is  increased 
when  one  recognizes  his  social  personality  as  a  constit- 
uent part  of  the  social  organism.  A  true  individuality  is 
the  condition  for  the  highest  personal  social  power.  The 
man  who  does  not  appreciate  himself  cannot  appreciate 
others ;  if  we  are  to  love  others  as  ourselves,  then  a  de- 
crease of  self-love  justifies  a  decrease  of  love  for  others. 
No  man  can  find  his  proper  place  or  perform  his  mission, 
unless  he  recognizes  himself  as  a  member  of  the  great 
social  organism  of  all  ages  and  of  all  humanity. 

We  distinguish  between  the  perfection  of  the  social 
mechanism  in  which  individuals  mov'e,  and  the  perfection 
of  the  social  personalities.  The  individual  in  society  is 
restrained  by  social  etiquette ;  he  adapts  himself  to  ex- 
isting manners  and  customs.  Whatever  his  own  con- 
victions may  be,  for  the  salvc  of  others  he  respects  certain 
traditions.  Long  before  able  to  think  or  act  for  himself, 
the  individual  breathes  the  ntmosphere  of  tlie  family, 
and  is  moulded  by  the  principles,  faitli,  and  practices  of 
the  home.  Tlie  laws  of  the  land  are  the  boundaries  in 
which  the  true  citizens  move. 

These  permanent  institutions  are  an  expression  of 
society,  but  they  outlive  the  society  of  any  particular 
period.  All  who  move  within  their  sphere  receive  the 
influence  embodied  in  them.  Sometimes  reformers  claim 
tliat  their  aim  is  to  reform  institutions  rather  than  in- 
dividuals. Tlioir  moaning  is  that  they  want  to  improve 
tlie  institutions  in  whicli  all  individuals  move  and  by 
which  they  are  affected.  The  advancement  of  these  in- 
stitutions means  the  advancement  of  the  social  organ- 
ism, so  that  all  the  members  may  reap  the  benefit.  If 
everywhere    the   family    could    be   improved,   then   hu- 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  225 

manity  itself,  all  whose  members  belong  to  the  family, 
would  be  improved.  Better  methods  of  education  mean 
better  influences  on  all  who  are  educated.  To  lift  the 
church  on  a  higher  plane  involves  the  exaltation  of  its 
members.  A  better  state,  more  equitable  laws,  and  more 
efficient  government  will  accrue  to  the  welfare  of  all  the 
citizens.  Through  individuals  and  organizations  institu- 
tions are  improved,  and  the  improved  institutions  benefit 
all  who  are  subject  to  their  influence.  The  whole  indus- 
trial w^orld  would  be  transformed  if  the  ethical  were 
made  to  dominate  over  the  economic  force,  instead  of 
being  made  subordinate. 

The  position  that  social  science  deals  with  what  has  been,  but 
not  with  what  ought  to  be,  is  illogical.  If  it  has  no  place  for 
ethics,  then  it  admits  its  inability  to  deal  even  with  the  past.  The 
admission  is  universal  that  it  must  interpret  social  phenomena. 
But  in  the  phenomena  to  be  interpreted  those  of  an  ethical  nature 
are  prominent.  The  social  student  is  confronted  by  ethical  sys- 
tems, individual  and  social ;  history  abounds  in  theories  respecting 
what  the  family,  the  state,  the  church,  and  voluntary  organizations 
ought  to  be ;  every  law  enacted  comes  with  the  force  of  an  impera- 
tive ;  reforms  have  been  inaugurated  and  reformatory  institutions 
established;  thus  at  every  point  in  his  investigations  the  historian 
meets  moral  problems  and  is  obliged  to  pronounce  moral  judgment, 
if  he  wants  to  estimate  the  historical  actuality.  All  through  his- 
tory, therefore,  we  have  the  imperative  as  well  as  the  indicative 
mood.i 

What  now  is  to  be  the  attitude  of  the  sociological  student  to  the 
ethical  facts,  demands,  theories,  and  institutions  which  he  encoun- 
ters in  studying  what  has  been?  It  is  his  mission  to  interpret 
them  like  all  other  social  phenomena.  But  this  involves  an  ethical 
system  as  the  test  of  historical  ethics. 

Sociological  ethics  is  thus  involved  in  the  very  affirmation  that 
Sociology  deals  with  the  actuality  of  human  society.  The  ethical 
factor  belongs  to  the  weightiest  actuality. 

Those  who  insist  on  making  ethics  a  product  of  evolution  will 

1  Cohn,  "  System  der  Nationalokonomie,"  i.,  75-78. 
15 


226     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

of  course  put  it  on  a  level  with  the  other  evolutionary  products  in 
Sociology  and  demand  its  recognition  in  the  social  system  ;  and  all 
who  recognize  the  scientific  character  of  ethics  will  demand  that  it 
be  incorporated  in  the  science  of  society  as  a  constituent  social 
factor. 

In  sociological  ethics,  as  shown  above,  we  do  not  limit  the  dis- 
cussion to  what  is  ordinarily  called  morality,  but  include  all  the 
elements  of  social  progress,  whether  pertaining  to  the  natural 
environment,  the  body,  the  intellect,  the  emotions,  or  the  will. 
Those  who  object  to  this  inclusiveness,  and  insist  on  confining 
sociological  ethics  solely  to  the  elements  of  morality,  ought  to  con- 
sider whether  society  can  be  truly  ethical  by  abstracting  morality 
from  humanity  and  treating  it  as  something  by  itself,  unconnected 
and  unrelated.  Society  can  be  truly  ethical  only  if  the  social  forces 
receive  their  proper  place  and  development  in  the  social  organism. 
It  is  not  ethical  to  develop  tlie  heart  at  the  expense  of  the  intellect, 
or  the  will  at  the  expense  of  the  emotions.  There  must  be  har- 
mony, unity,  completeness.  Sociological  ethics  could  not  be  com- 
plete if  any  element  of  social  progress  were  neglected.  From  the 
point  of  view  taken  by  Sociology  it  is  immoral  to  separate  moral- 
ity from  its  organic  connections  and  develop  it  in  a  one-sided 
manner. 

There  can  be  no  mistake  with  respect  to  the  attitude  of  sociologi- 
cal ethics  toward  the  theory  which  treats  evolution  as  something  to 
which  society  is  subject,  but  over  which  it  has  no  control.  We  can 
recognize  the  power  of  mechanical  processes  in  social  affairs  with- 
out ignoring  the  power  of  volition.  The  perversion  begins  when 
psychology  forgets  the  inherent  energy  of  the  mind  and  enslaves 
the  personality  to  its  environment.  The  true  nature  of  many 
social  processes  is  missed  by  the  failure  to  recognize  teleological 
action,  rational  ideals,  and  human  initiative,  in  human  society. 
The  cardinal  distinction  between  the  unalterable  working  of  a 
natural  law,  and  the  ability  of  man  to  use  that  unalterable  law 
for  his  rational  ends,  is  overlooked.  Thus  instead  of  being  blindly 
and  irresistibly  pushed  forward  by  an  evolutionary  force  which 
works  through  environment,  heredity,  habit,  and  custom,  men  can 
be  controlled  by  reason,  can  oppose  the  natural  evolution,  and 
can  choose  to  move  themselves  instead  of  being  pushed  resist- 
lessly  on. 

We  but  give  the  environment  its  du;>  when  we  again  emphasize 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  227 

the  necessity  of  considering  the  nature  of  that  which  is  environed. 
Imagination  may  likewise  attribute  to  heredity  what  no  scientific 
induction  warrants.  Some  theories  of  heredity  seem  ready  to 
restore  the  "  innate  ideas  "  which  Locke  thought  he  had  annihi- 
lated ;  but  aU  that  can  be  postulated  at  bii'th  is  certain  capacities, 
whose  development  depends  on  environment  and  on  personal  energy. 

The  real  supremacy  of  mind,  if  duly  recognized,  will  again 
emancipate  thought  and  enthi-one  reason.  We  do  not  mean  that 
speculation  is  now  wildly,  as  in  former  times,  to  spread  its  wings 
and  soar  in  aerial  realms ;  the  advance  of  science  has  made  that 
impossible.  But  it  means  that  to  the  modern  emphasis  on  reality 
shall  be  added  the  real  energy  of  thought  in  the  search  for  truth, 
as  exercised  by  the  profound  thinkers  from  Socrates  to  Lotze. 

Professor  Bastian,  one  of  the  first  of  living  ethnologists,  in  tak- 
ing the  Philosophical  Society  of  Berlin  through  the  Ethnological 
Museum  of  that  city,  explained  the  process  of  development  from 
the  savage  to  the  civilized  stage,  using  the  rich  treasures  of  the 
collections  as  illustrations.  Pie  laid  special  stress  on  man's  sub- 
jection to  nature  in  the  lower  stages  of  culture.  "  But,"  he  said, 
"the  serious  mistake  made  by  Buckle  is,  that  he  thought  what  is 
true  of  man  in  his  savage  state  is""  also  true  of  him  during  all  the 
stages  of  development,  namely,  that  he  always  remains  under  the 
dominion  of  his  environment.  The  truth,  however,  is,  that  man 
frees  himself  from  his  en\dronment  in  proportion  as  he  rises  in 
civilization,  so  that  instead  of  being  nature's  slave  he  becomes  its 
master."  In  this  ability  to  rise  superior  to  his  environment  we 
have  the  condition  for  the  formation  of  ethical  ideals. 

We  have  not  the  condition.s  for  determining  scientifically  just 
why  certain  objects  are  chosen  by  the  mind  as  the  aim  of  its  teleo- 
logical  action.  Therefore  it  is  far  more  scientific  to  confess  om* 
ignorance  in  this  respect  than  to  attribute  the  end  chosen  to  en- 
vironment, to  heredity,  or  to  the  mechanical  working  of  some  un- 
known law.  The  mind  itself  is  not  sufficiently  known  or  under 
our  control  for  us  to  say  definitely  what  is  inherent  in  it  and  what 
is  due  to  the  environment.  The  very  fact,  however,  that  the  mind 
can  and  does  act  teleologically  lifts  it  out  of  the  mechanism  of 
nature, — a  fact  of  momentous  significance  in  social  affairs,  and 
most  of  all  in  sociological  ethics.^ 

1  Haeckel  ("The  Evolution  of  Man,"  chapter  v.)  says:  "  Erasmus  Darwin 
transmitted  to  his  grandson  Charles,  according  to  the  law  of  latent  transmission 


228     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  reality  of  the  past,  based  on  tlie  history  of  what  has  actu- 
ally occurred,  naturally  impresses  us  more  than  any  conception  of 
the  future.  Yet  for  the  past,  which  has  made  its  indelible  record, 
we  can  do  nothing ;  at  best  we  can  only  appropriate  what  it  has 
wrought.  AVe  can,  however,  devote  our  energies  to  the  future, 
which  can  do  nothing  for  us.  It  therefore  seems  unreasonable  to 
take  a  deep  interest  in  the  past  and  none  in  what  is  yet  to  come  to 
pass,  unless  we  are  intent  solely  on  having  something  done  for  us, 
not  considering  what  we  can  do  for  others. 

The  indefiniteness  of  the  f  utiu-e  compared  with  the  solid  actu- 
ality of  the  past,  may  lead  some  sociologists  to  emphasize  the 
historical  evolution  of  society,  while  they  have  no  room  for  socio- 
logical ethics.  The  same  reason  may  make  it  ditficult  to  interest 
persons  in  a  progress  which  is  not  tangible  but  pertains  to  coming 
generations.  Not  many  recognize  their  solidarity  with  humanity 
sufficiently  to  take  an  earnest  interest  in  benefits  to  be  reaped 
through  then-  efforts  by  others,  but  which  they  themselves  shall  not 
share.  We  have  a  right,  however,  to  expect  the  study  of  Sociology 
to  intensify  the  conviction  of  this  solidarity. 

In  sociological  ethics  the  idea  of  progress  is  of  especial  signifi- 
cance. So  long  as  the  notion  itself  remains  vague  the  principles 
it  involves  will  be  obscure. 

Respecting  both  the  nature  of  progress  and  the  objects  to  be 
benefited  by  it,  different  views  have  prevailed.  Hardly  any  one 
in  an  enlightened  land  would  now  regard  an  individual,  say  a  mon- 
arch, or  an  imperial  family  like  that  of  Russia,  as  the  sole  or  chief 
recipient  of  the  blessings  of  progress.  The  general  trend  in  favor 
of  equalization  is  depriving  the  nobility  and  aristocracy  of  the 
claim  to  supreme  consideration.  There  is  still  class  dominion 
and  class  legislation,  giving  peculiar  advantages  to  a  select  few ; 
but  the  prevalent  theory,  at  least  in  free  countries,  whatever  the 
practice  may  be,  regai'ds  the  people,  wdthout  the  old  artificial  dis- 
tinctions, as  the  objects  of  well-being  and  of  exaltation.  It  is, 
however,  astonishing  how  recent  this  conception  of  the  aim  of 
progress  is,  and  in  how  small  a  part  of  the  human  race  it  even  now 
prevails. 

(Atavism),  certain  molecular  movements  of  the  cells  in  the  ganglia  of  his  power- 
ful brain,  which  hart  not  marte  their  appearance  in  his  son  Robert."  Molecular 
movements  transniittert  to  :i  grandson  is  surely  remarkable.  How  is  it  known, 
or  can  it  be  known,  that  the^-  were  transmittedV 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  229 

When  we  limit  our  inquiries  to  particular  spheres,  the  nature  of 
progress  does  not  seem  difficult.  There  are  gradual  increments 
which  escape  observation ;  but  the  results  become  evident  in  long 
periods.  Epochs  also  occur  when  great  improvements  are  suddenly 
introduced.  Ocular  demonstrations  can  be  given  of  the  develop- 
ment from  the  use  of  tallow  candle  for  light  to  that  of  electricity ; 
no  less  marked  is  the  progress  from  Fulton's  simple  steam  engine 
to  the  vast  and  complicated  machinery  which  propels  our  largest 
ocean  steamers.  The  advances  made  throughout  the  ages  can  also 
be  traced  when  we  pass  from  a  single  object  to  large  departments 
of  human  thought  and  skill,  as  in  letters,  in  philosophy  and  sci- 
ence, in  aesthetics,  politics,  and  economics.  History  makes  a 
specialty  of  these  subjects.  But  it  is  not  so  easy  to  furnish  a  con- 
cise definition  of  human  progi'ess  which  gives  only  its  essence 
while  inclusive  of  all  its  details. 

Progress  is  not  mere  movement,  but  movement  which  means 
actual  advance.  It  is  growth,  development ;  but  evils  may  grow 
and  result  in  deterioration.  Human  progress  always  stands  for 
improvement,  for  advance  toward  a  desirable  goal,  toward  an  ideal. 
It  consists  in  the  evolution  of  something  in  itself  valuable,  in  un- 
folding truth  and  destroying  error,  in  creating  more  of  the  good 
and  making  the  good  better. 

Progress  solves  old  problems  and  perhajis  discovers  in  the  solu- 
tions greater  problems  than  the  ones  solved.  The  advancing 
movement  of  the  ages  consists  of  solutions  and  revelations  of 
problems.  We  master  a  system  and  pass  beyond  it;  we  catch  up 
with  a  thinker  and  can  dispense  with  him  who  formerly  seemed 
indispensable ;  we  get  the  contents  of  an  age  and  move  on  toward 
the  next ;  we  drop  something,  but  always  get  more  than  we  lose ; 
whatever  has  abiding  qualities  is  preserved  in  the  higher  form 
into  which  it  is  developed.  There  is  the  tragedy  of  death  as  well 
as  the  joy  of  birth  in  progress. 

We  must  not  forget  that  to  hand  down  the  achievements  of  the 
past  is  but  one  factor  in  the  process  of  culture.  "N^'hat  is  thus 
transmitted  promotes  civilization  only  if  personally  appropriated 
and  elaborated.  An  Aristotle  may  be  obscured  for  ages  because 
the  appreciation  of  his  works  is  lacking,  and  even  the  Bible  may 
be  a  buried  treasure. 

The  ultimate  aim  of  social  progress  cannot  be  anything  short 
of  social  perfection.     All  the  parts  and  forces  and  functions  of 


230     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

society  are  to  be  made  perfect.  Just  what  this  most  advanced 
perfect  stage  must  be  cannot  be  described  beforehand.  It  is  a 
general  idea  toward  which  all  social  progress  is  to  tend,  the  defi- 
uiteness  of  the  idea  increasing  in  projiortion  to  its  realization. 

At  each  particular  social  stage  it  is  not  so  difficult  to  determine 
what  elements  of  progress  are  specially  in  demand.  Certain  ills 
are  to  be  removed,  certain  excellences  to  be  promoted.  So  far  as 
practicable,  the  progress  sought  at  any  age  is  to  be  a  stage  in  the 
development  toward  social  perfection.  But  the  strongest  impulse 
to  progress  is  in  the  felt  needs  of  an  age,  not  in  any  remote  ideal. 
"  The  distant  future  of  a  country  is  so  unimportant  by  the  side  of 
its  immediate  needs  to  the  men  in  possession,  that  even  if  they 
were  reasonably  certain  that  a  particular  evil  ought  to  be  guarded 
against  at  an  immediate  sacrifice,  they  would  rarely  be  possessed 
of  the  moral  force  required  for  the  effort.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  only  a  few  persons  can  feel  reasonably  certain  as  to  the 
future,  because  only  a  few  busy  themselves  with  distant  specula- 
tions." (Pearson,  "National  Life  and  Character,"  pp.  9-10).  It 
is  also  to  be  considered  that  those  who  want  to  affect  the  future 
must  do  it  through  the  generation  in  which  they  live. 

It  is  clear  that  the  individuals  in  society  are  to  share  in  the 
progress.  As  we  have  seen,  individual  and  social  progress  are 
organically  connected.  The  individual  is  to  share  the  development 
of  society,  just  as  society  is  to  be  a  partaker  of  the  advancement 
of  the  social  personality.  This,  however,  is  very  different  from 
making  individual  feeling  the  aim  of  social  progress.  Society  has 
in  itself  the  end  of  its  development,  not  something  outside  of 
itself. 

In  sociological  ethics  we  have  both  a  science  and  an  art ;  the 
art  is,  however,  but  an  application  of  the  science,  and  can  be 
treated  as  a  corollary  of  the  science.  We  need  not  hesitate  to 
include  the  principles  of  this  art  in  Sociology.  The  science  of 
sociological  ethics  treats  of  principles :  what  ought  to  be,  what  the 
social  ideal  is,  what  the  social  good  is,  what  is  right,  and  what 
sliould  be  the  aim  in  social  action.  As  an  art,  social  ethics  seeks 
to  realize  the  ideal.  The  worker  is  an  artist  who  takes  the  social 
actuality  as  the  material  which  he  is  to  shape.  For  the  individual, 
for  every  social  group,  and  for  society  at  large,  this  ethical  trans- 
formation of  the  actuality  into  the  ideal  is  the  practical  problem. 
As  Michael  Angelo  shapes  the  rough  block  of  marble  into  a  Moses 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  231 

or  a  David,  so  the  social  worker  wants  to  shape  the  social  reality 
into  a  form  which  now  exists  only  in  his  mind.  What  is  sub- 
jective, a  mere  mental  concept,  is  to  be  made  objective.  For 
complete  ethics  both  the  scientific  and  the  artistic  concepts  are 
essential. 

Schaffle  (i.  195)  shows  the  importance  of  studying  the  actual 
situation.  He  says  :  "  Whoever  does  not  understand  and  consider 
the  existing  social  condition,  with  respect  both  to  what  is  good 
and  to  what  is  bad,  will  neither  be  able  to  explain  the  historic 
processes  of  the  past,  nor  to  accomplish  social  reforms,  however 
good  his  intentions  may  be." 

The  relation  of  the  individual  conscience  to  what  may  be 
analogically,  not  literally,  called  the  social  conscience  is  important. 
Shall  the  individual  be  independent  in  his  ethical  judgments, 
setting  himself  against  society,  his  personal  convictions  against 
those  which  are  historical,  his  notion  of  right  against  that  of  the 
community  ?  One  is  more  apt  to  be  mistaken,  we  are  told,  than 
the  social  consensus  of  the  past  and  the  present.  Yet  what  is  the 
individual  worth  if  his  morality  is  a  kind  of  public  contagion,  if 
his  convictions  are  not  his  personal  elaboration  and  possession,  and 
if  he  does  not  maintain  them  at  all  hazards?  The  common 
morality  is  the  popular  test,  and  he  who  falls  below  it  is  condemned 
as  inferior ;  but  it  is  equally  certain  that  distinction  in  excellence 
is  to  be  obtained  only  by  rising  above  the  ordinary  level.  The 
social  conscience  reveals  itself  in  the  press,  in  laws,  in  customs, 
in  traditions,  institutions,  creeds,  and  political  parties.  What  is 
called  public  morality  is  frequently  nothing  but  public  legality; 
from  the  ethics  of  the  individual  personality,  social  morality  must 
necessarily  be  distinguished. 

We  must  distinguish  between  quantitative  and  qualitative 
progress.  The  quantitative  consists  in  the  multiplication  of  the 
same  kind  of  objects  or  forces ;  the  qualitative  in  the  improvement 
of  the  objects  or  forces.  In  the  one  case  there  is  a  growth  in  mass, 
in  the  other  a  development  of  the  character  of  the  mass.  Thus  in 
a  nation  we  can  distinguish  between  the  increase  of  population, 
say  from  three  to  seventy  millions,  and  the  intellectual  and  moral 
development  of  the  people.  The  same  kinds  of  societies  can  be 
multiplied,  or  the  societies  themselves  improved. 

Let  us  suppose  that  the  highest  of  the  existing  social  organiza- 
tions is  so  multiplied  as  continually  to  include  a  larger  portion  of 


232     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

humanity,  what  will  the  effect  be?  The  benefits  of  that  organiza- 
tion will  be  spread  and  a  constantly  growing  number  of  human 
beings  blessed  by  it.  The  freedom  attained  by  one  people  can  in 
this  way  exert  a  contagious  influence  on  others. 

But  great  as  the  blessings  thus  conferred  are,  it  is  only  the 
working  and  diffusing  throughout  humanity  of  an  already  existing 
leaven,  not  tlie  introduction  of  a  new  power.  This  new  power  is 
gained  by  the  creation  of  something  better  than  now  exists,  by  an 
improvement  in  the  social  forces  and  in  their  working.  Even 
those  interested  in  processes  of  civilization  seem,  as  a  rule,  more 
intent  on  the  spread  of  civilization  than  on  attaining  a  higher 
civilization  than  that  already  existing. 

How  is  a  higher  civilization  than  that  now  existing  to  be 
attained  ?  "We  cherish  the  hope  that  the  answer  to  this  will  be 
furnished  by  the  study  of  Sociology,  especially  by  the  development 
of  sociological  ethics.  Much  will  be  gained  by  the  social  education 
of  the  individual,  that  is,  by  such  a  development  of  his  social 
forces  that  whatever  of  him  belongs  to  society  shaU  be  given  to 
society.  This  will  insure  a  direct  development  of  the  social  forces 
themselves,  the  primitive  elements  of  society.  The  sociological 
conception  of  the  individual  as  an  integral  factor  of  humanity 
must  stimulate  his  sociological  thinking,  feeling,  and  volition,  so 
that  he  will  rise  above  a  conception  which  is  limited  to  self  and  to 
the  various  societies  joined  by  him.  The  interests,  the  affections, 
and  the  activities  will  be  enlarged  and  exalted. 

The  heightening  of  the  social  forces  is  not,  however,  the  only 
means  for  attaining  a  higher  civilization.  There  can  be  improve- 
ment in  the  interaction  of  these  forces  and  in  the  associations 
formed.  Not  only  are  there  in  civilization  forces  not  found  in 
barbarism,  but  the  mechanism  of  the  forces  is  improved,  as  we 
have  seen,  and  the  societies  formed  are  made  superior.  Thus 
there  may  be  an  advance  in  social  aims,  in  the  objects  of  social 
interest,  in  the  means  for  attaining  these  objects,  and  in  the 
results  of  social  action. 

Among  primitive  people  exertion  that  leads  to  progress  seems 
to  be  the  result  of  necessity,  of  the  natural  and  social  environment, 
far  more  than  of  an  innate  progressive  impulse.  We  can  well  im- 
agine an  absence  of  competition  and  of  the  need  of  exertion  which 
means  the  peace  of  the  graveyard. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  may  be  in  individuals  and  societies  an 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  233 

inner  impulse  toward  progress,  particularly  in  higher  stages  of  cul- 
ture. As  the  body  grows  from  infancy  to  manhood,  so  there  may 
be  stages  of  the  harmonious  development  of  society,  just  as  the 
mind  may  attain  an  intellectual  develoiiment  which  shall  contain 
an  impulse  to  deeper  and  broader  knowledge,  and  higher  and 
purer  truth. 

Ward  discusses  in  his  second  volume  numerous  subjects  which 
pertain  to  sociological  ethics,  such  as  teleology,  progress,  and  the 
end  to  be  attained. 

In  "  The  Social  Problem  "  the  author  of  this  Introduction  dis- 
cusses the  ethical  aspects  of  many  of  the  social  problems  of  the 
day. 

REFLECTIONS. 

What  is  meant  by  Social  Ethics  as  a  Part  of  Sociology  ? 
What  it  includes.  Relation  to  Individual  Ethics.  Exact 
Aim  of  Social  Progress.  Explanation  of  the  Trend  to  sub- 
ordinate the  Individual  to  Society  and  make  Social  Ethics 
supreme.  What  Aid  is  furnished  Social  Ethics  by  the 
Principles  of  Society  j^er  se  and  by  Social  Evolution  ?  In- 
dividual and  Social  Responsibility.  Criminals  as  Social 
Products.  The  Ground  of  Responsibility.  Evolution  and 
Revolution  in  Progress.  Conservative,  Radical,  and  Pro- 
gressive Elements.  Destructive  and  Constructive  Forces. 
Reform  and  Regeneration.  Basis  for  Union  of  Reforms. 
The  Permanent  and  the  Variable  Elements  in  Social  Prog- 
ress. Does  the  Aim  to  develop  Great  Personalities  con- 
flict -with  the  aim  to  elevate  the  Masses  ?  Hovtr  far  does 
an  Advance  to  higher  Social  Forms  affect  the  low^er  Social 
Forms  ?  Distinction  between  the  Improvement  of  the 
Social  Organism  and  Individual  Improvement.  Impor- 
tance of  improving  Social  Institutions.  Reasons  for  Soci- 
ological Ethics.      Review  of  the  Chapter. 


Completeness  of  the  Division  of  Sociology. 

Sociological  ethics  completes  the  division  of  our  sub- 
ject. A  review  of  the  scheme  thus  presented  gives  a 
clear,  comprehensive,  and  exhaustive  analysis  of  Soci- 


234     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY   OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ology ;  that  is,  there  is  nothing  which  pertains  to  socio- 
logical principles  and  phenomena  which  does  not  find 
its  place  in  these  divisions.  Each  of  the  three  divisions 
furnishes  a  distinct  subject,  each  is  extensive  and  rich 
enough  as  a  department  for  separate  treatment,  and 
neither  of  them  includes  material  foreign  to  Sociology. 
The  main  difficulty  consists  in  the  vastness,  the  variety, 
and  the  complexity  of  the  materials. 

But  even  with  these  three  divisions,  is  not  the  subject 
unmanageable  ?  For  the  second  division  subdivisions 
may  be  necessary,  such  as  have  been  indicated.  Thus 
the  genesis  of  society  can  be  divided  into  the  evolution 
of  the  various  social  forms  and  stages  of  culture  :  how 
primitive  society  developed,  how  civilization  began,  and 
how  the  highest  civilization  was  attained ;  the  family, 
the  state,  the  church,  voluntary  organizations  can  also 
be  treated  separately.  The  conditions,  causes,  and  de- 
grees of  culture  in  different  nations  can  also  be  dis- 
cussed, as  the  social  development  of  the  Hebrews,^ 
Greeks,  Romans,  and  more  recent  peoples  of  Europe 
and  America.  After  the  general  idea  of  Sociology  has 
been  attained,  it  may  be  most  profitable  to  take  up  the 
evolution  of  society  in  general,  and  then  specialize  by 
taking  up  certain  periods,  nations,  and  institutions. 
Even  for  a  general  idea  of  Sociology  a  thorough  study 
of  different  social  groups  is  essential,  leading  the  stu- 
dent from  an  institution,  a  social  organization,  or  some 
particular  phase  of  culture  to  the  science  of  society. 
For  the  apprehension  of  society  as  a  totality,  it  is  im- 
portant for  the  beginner  to  trace  the  connection  between 

^  From  the  ethical  point  of  view,  Israel  is  by  far  the  most  interesting 
and  most  important  of  the  peoples  of  antiquity.  This  is  due  both  to  the 
character  of  the  social  arrangements  and  to  the  completeness  of  the  ac- 
count given  of  them  in  tlie  Old  Testament. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  235 

allied  social  groups,  then  between  those  less  closely  re- 
lated, also  between  such  as  are  in  conflict  with  one  an- 
other, thus  following  the  social  bonds  throughout  a 
nation  to  internationalism  and  humanity. 

Whatever  our  analysis  for  purposes  of  clearness  and 
specialization,  we  need  the  comprehensive  scheme  given 
in  the  divisions  for  an  exhaustive  conception  of  society. 
Human  association  as  a  whole,  embracing  all  kinds  of 
societies,  is  the  condition  for  understanding  any  par- 
ticular social  form.  This  is  but  saying  that  an  organ 
can  only  be  understood  in  its  relation  to  the  organism. 
Hence  our  emphasis  on  including  in  the  science  of 
society  every  kind  of  association,  from  the  family  to 
humanity.  But  it  has  been  shown  that  this  does  not 
imply  that  now  every  element  of  society  is  the  exclu- 
sive possession  of  Sociology.  In  many  instances  Soci- 
ology is  perhaps  only  to  furnish  the  large  scheme  or 
outline  in  which  all  the  elements  are  included,  and  to 
indicate  their  place  in  the  sociological  system.  It  has 
been  clearly  stated  that  their  independent  development 
can  then  be  left  to  specific  social  sciences.  Economics 
and  politics  can  continue  as  separate  disciplines  for 
independent  development.  The  aim  to  make  Sociology 
perfect  may  itself  grow  in  distinctness,  exactness,  and 
comprehensiveness,  in  the  process  of  sociological  de- 
velopment. With  the  sole  purpose  of  leading  the  stu- 
dent into  the  subject  as  our  guide,  we  do  not  profess  to 
mark  out  the  exact  course  of  sociological  thought,  or  to 
determine  the  character  of  Sociology  during  any  period 
of  its  progress.     Our  theory  of  prevision  forbids  this. 

The  student  who  wants  to  adopt  only  finished  results, 
and  to  finish  his  education  with  their  appropriation  is 
out  of  his  place  in  sociological  investigations.  Even 
the   results    already   attained   in   Sociology   cannot   be 


236     INTRODUCTION  TO   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

appropriated  in  that  way.  They  must  be  earned  to  be 
possessed.  Tlie  great  truths  of  the  science  of  society 
are  not  transmitted  from  teacher  to  pupil,  but  must 
be  personally  elaborated.  Then  there  is  a  large  still 
unexplored  territory  which  the  student  should  enter  as 
a  pioneer. 

In  many  instances  it  would  have  been  more  easy  to 
give  accounts  of  institutions  than  to  map  out  the  work 
which  requires  the  attention  of  the  beginner,  and  to  in- 
dicate the  course  for  original  investigation.  Here  our 
aim,  however,  is  not  to  make  finished  sociologists,  but 
to  prepare  the  way  for  sociological  investigation  and  to 
guide  the  sociological  inquirer.  Hence  problems  have 
been  given,  problems  which  involve  the  greatness  of 
our  subject,  which  are  an  inspiration  to  research,  and 
which  impel  to  efforts  at  solution.  The  true  student 
masters  what  has  been  done,  for  the  purpose  of  getting 
the  means  for  accomplishing  what  yet  remains  to  be 
done.  The  special  application  of  this  to  sociological 
ethics  is  evident.     Sociology  without  ethics  is  a  torso. 

It  may  require  much  reflection  on  the  part  of  the  beginner  to 
apprehend  clearly  the  vast  amount  of  material  included  in  the 
three  divisions.  Society  as  a  totality  is  to  be  analyzed ;  the  analy- 
sis must  include  all  the  contents  of  society,  so  that  a  synthesis  of 
the  parts  found  by  the  analysis  gives  the  social  totality.  Our 
divisions  give  the  analysis  of  the  subject,  and  the  synthesis  of  the 
divisions  again  gives  us  Sociology. 

Let  us  suppose  society  represeiited  by  a  tree.  The  soil  and  roots 
are  the  principles,  the  elements  from  which  the  tree  grows  and  on 
wliich  its  life  depends.  The  tree  above  ground  represents  the  his- 
toric evolution ;  in  the  branches  at  different  heights  we  see  the 
various  stages  of  evolution ;  in  the  fruit,  the  culmination  of  the 
growth,  we  behold  the  present.  We  then  inquire  whether  in 
the  roots  and  the  trunk  some  conditions  are  not  found  for  the 
improvement  of  the  fruit  in  coming  generations:  that  gives  us 
socioloijical  ethics. 


SOCIOLOGICAL  ETHICS.  237 

Are  there  any  more  aspects  in  which  society  can  be  viewed? 

Using  terms  of  evolution,  we  say  that  there  is  something  to  be 
evolved,  the  original  elements  or  principles ;  that  we  have  the 
evolution  itself,  the  history  and  present  attainments  of  society ; 
that  there  are  definite  tendencies  toward  the  future,  but  that  we 
can  also  treat  the  future  teleologically,  choosing  a  certain  end 
(design),  and  then  working  for  what  we  conceive  ought  to  be. 
This  teleology  includes  what  men  ought  to  be  physically,  intellectu- 
ally, morally,  spiritually,  in  their  associated  capacity. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Sociology  as  a  Totality.  Its  Divisions  and  what  they 
include.  Does  any  Sociological  Conception  lie  outside  of 
these  Divisions  ?  Distinction  between  the  Principles  of 
Society  per  se,  the  Principles  of  Social  Evolution,  and 
the  Principles  of  Sociological  Ethics.  Review  of  all  the 
Divisions. 


238     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE    METHOD    IN   THE    STUDY   OF    SOCIOLOGY. 

The  Problem.  Perhaps  on  account  of  the  variety  in 
the  materials  ive  ought  rather  to  speak  of  methods.  The 
course  thus  far  pursued  will  make  the  subject  more  easy  ; 
we  need  hut  become  fully  conscious  of  the  processes  we 
have  folloived. 

Method,  a  plan  of  work  ;  the  aim.  the  complete  mastery 
of  a  subject  in  the  best  way,  according  to  the  principles  of 
utility.  Owing  to  the  neglect  of  method,  the  work  of  stu- 
dents is  hap-hazard ;  they  are  not  fully  aware  of  what 
they  do,  because  they  do  not  know  why  they  do  it.  Even 
if  there  are  various  ways  of  doing  a  thing,  one  may  be 
superior  to  the  rest. 

The  subject  determines  the  method.  Whatever  unity 
may  underlie  the  varied  phenomena  of  the  world,  differ- 
ent methods  are  required  for  mathematics,  chemistry, 
psychology,  and  social  affairs.  The  different  factors 
ivhich  enter  the  science  of  society  may  require  different 
methods  of  treatment,  and  often  it  becomes  a  problem 
which  shall  be  adopted. 

The  social  present  must  be  learned  from  persorial  obser- 
vation and  from  the  investigations  of  others.  What  others 
record  of  their  investigations  must  be  critically  scruti- 
nized, just  as  in  the  case  of  historical  documents.  The 
observation  of  social  facts,  still  more  than  of  natural  facts, 
requires  special  training.      When  the  facts  are  obtained, 


THE  METHOD  IN  TUE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     239 

ive  try  to  fathom  their  meaning  and  to  learn  their  causes. 
We  want  to  know  how  things  became  and  why  they  he- 
came.  No  step  beyond  a  mere  knowledge  of  facts  is 
possible  without  induction  and  deduction.  Analysis  is 
necessary,  but  also  synthesis/  indeed,  in  Sociology  the 
analysis  is  for  the  sake  of  the  synthesis.  TJie  growing 
importance  attached  to  statistical  inqui7'ies  in  the  science 
of  society  makes  it  necessary  to  determine  their  exact 
province  and  their  limitations. 

After  it  has  been  definitely  stated  what  is  to  be  done 
by  Sociology,  we  naturally  take  up  the  problem  how  it  is 
to  be  done. 

By  devoting  a  separate  chapter  to  this  important  sub- 
ject we  can  concentrate,  develop,  and  supplement  what 
was  said  about  method  in  the  preceding  chapters.  An 
elaborate  inquiry  is  not  necessary,  since  the  method  of 
our  discipline  is  essentially  the  same  as  in  the  other 
humanistic  studies  and  is  frequently  discussed  in  phi- 
losophy, particularly  in  works  on  logic.  As  this  is  not 
an  introduction  to  Sociology,  but  to  its  study,  such 
suggestions  are  offered  as  are  likely  to  be  of  special 
service  to  beginners  in  social  science.  For  them  the 
subject,  which  is  usually  placed  at  the  beginning,  will 
be  more  easy  here,  after  the  preceding  chapters  have 
been  studied.  The  very  discipline  in  the  method  fur- 
nished by  those  chapters  will  aid  them  in  understand- 
ing the  subject.  Particularly  for  those  who  want  to 
make  independent  sociological  investigations  will  a 
discussion  of  the  method  be  valuable. 

So  universally  is  the  a  priori  method  now  rejected  in 
theory  that  there  ought  to  be  no  necessity  for  discuss- 
ing its  abuses.  While  Sociology  involves  much  that 
would  formerly  have  been  treated  metaphysically  and 


240     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

speculatively,  such  a  treatment  would  hardly  be  at- 
tempted consciously  in  our  empirical  era.  No  claim 
is  made  that  society  can  be  interpreted  by  postulating 
certain  powers  as  inherent  in  human  nature,  and  then 
speculating  on  the  association  and  evolution  which  must 
result  from  their  exercise.  It  is  not  possible  to  form 
any  presupposition  which  will  relieve  us  of  the  neces- 
sity of  making  the  most  careful  inquiry  into  the  imme- 
diate causes  of  social  phenomena.  Yet  while  with  the 
theory  on  this  subject  there  ought  to  be  no  question 
respecting  the  metaphysical  principles,  there  is  diffi- 
culty regarding  the  application.  The  assumptions  with 
which  Sociology  has  teemed  from  the  beginning  serve 
as  a  warning  to  future  investigators. 

The  social  realism  should  be  made  an  object  of  con- 
stant study.  Even  in  doing  this  prejudices  are  apt  to 
lurk  in  the  mind,  which  anticipate  and  pervert  the 
results.  We  have  shown  that  other  departments  of 
thought  are  by  no  means  to  be  ignored ;  but  whatever 
aid  they  may  give,  they  cannot  furnish  the  subject- 
matter  of  Sociology.  Just  as  in  every  other  discipline 
we  discover  the  elements  by  means  of  an  analysis  of 
the  subject  itself,  so  must  we  proceed  with  society. 
We  may  consider  the  known  forces  in  inorganic  and 
organic  matter;  but  we  must  study  their  effects  on 
humanity  in  these  effects  themselves.  Analogy  should 
not  be  identified  with  likeness,  nor  similarity  with 
sameness ;  mere  precedence  is  not  cause,  any  more  than 
night  produces  the  day  that  follows.  The  severest 
scientific  scrutiny  is  required  in  order  to  prevent  a 
mere  habit,  whether  it  be  philosophical,  spiritualistic, 
or  materialistic,  from  being  made  the  law  of  being. 
On  a  valid  basis  the  inferences  must  be  strictly  logical, 
in  order  to  counteract  the  illusions  of  analogical  rea- 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     241 

soning.  It  is  not  a  whit  more  evidence  of  ignorance  to 
attribute  to  God  what  we  cannot  otherwise  explain, 
than  to  attribute  it  to  matter,  to  natural  law,  to  biol- 
ogy, so  far  as  these  belong  to  the  unknowable. 

An  earnest  desire  to  interpret  everything  must  not  be 
taken  for  the  ability  to  do  so,  still  less  for  the  actual 
interpretation.  True  science  insists  on  the  limit  of 
reason  as  a  matter  of  experience,  if  not  as  an  axiom. 
Wherever  faith  may  soar  or  philosophy  speculate,  the 
ultimate  problems  are  clearly  beyond  the  demonstra- 
tions of  science;  therefore  terms  which  imply  that  ulti- 
mate solutions  have  been  found  should  be  avoided. 
Such  expressions  as  natural  causation,  natural  law, 
material  force,  require  explanation  in  order  to  be  of 
service  in  sociological  interpretation.  Since  every 
object  is  to  be  studied  and  explained  according  to  its 
inherent  character,  it  might  be  well  to  adopt  such  terms 
as  personal  laws  and  human  laws  for  what  pertains  to 
personality  and  to  humanity.  This  retains  the  pecu- 
liar personal  and  human  elements,  without  prejudice  to 
their  ultimate  interpretation.  So  in  distinction  from 
what  may  be  called  the  metaphysical,  speculative,  and 
biological  methods,  we  propose  the  sociological  method 
as  the  only  one  fit  for  our  subject  in  the  present  state 
of  knowledge.  By  the  sociological  method  we  mean 
that  the  nature  of  the  sociological  subject  must  deter- 
mine the  method  of  procedure,  and  that  no  discipline 
that  is  foreign  or  of  doubtful  application  be  made  the 
law  of  Sociology.  The  social  forces  in  individuals  are 
psychical,  whatever  influence  may  be  exerted  by  nature ; 
they  arc  distinctively  human  forces,  and  as  such  they 
must  be  taken.  They  are  not  to  be  confounded  with 
physical  or  mechanical  forces.  They  are  conscious, 
volitional,  purposive,  at  least  in  their  highest  develop- 

16 


242     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ment,  in  which  respects  they  differ  from  what  is  merely 
mechanical.  The  sociological  method  concentrates  the 
attention  on  what  is  peculiar  to  society,  and  considers 
its  peculiarity  as  societary.  In  thus  advocating  a 
sociological  method  we  merely  recognize  and  apply  a 
principle  generally  accepted,  namely,  that  whatever 
similarity  of  method  may  prevail  in  different  disci- 
plines, each  subject  distinct  in  itself  must  also  have  a 
method  according  to  its  distinctness.  The  subject- 
matter  and  the  aim  are  the  factors  which  determine 
the  method  of  inquiry. 

Light  will  be  thrown  on  the  sociological  method 
when  we  illustrate  its  working  as  compared  with  the 
method  in  the  special  social  sciences.  In  economics, 
for  instance,  as  before  shown,  we  consider  simply  the 
economic  force  in  its  operations ;  but  in  Sociology  we 
consider  the  economic  force  in  its  relation  to,  and  co- 
operation with,  all  the  other  social  forces. 

When  we  speak  of  a  sociological  method,  meaning 
that  the  nature  of  the  material  considered  determines 
the  law  of  its  investigation,  we  do  not  prejudice  the 
solution  of  the  ultimate  problems ;  and  while  this 
method  excludes  all  foreign  laws,  it  has  room,  in  their 
proper  place,  for  all  material  and  spiritual  elements 
wherever  found.  Another  advantage  in  adopting  the 
sociological  method  consists  in  the  fact  that  whatever 
elements  are  used  must  be  in  the  sociological  form. 
Thus  the  biological  factors  used  arc  not  brutal,  but 
human  and  social. 

While  carefully  moving  within  the  limits  of  scientific 
inquiry  we  are  not  to  be  mere  social  empirics.  We 
must  be  truly  rational  as  well  as  empirical.  By  a 
strange  perversion  the  mere  accumulation  and  classifi- 
cation  of  facts   are   called   scientific,   while   rational 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     243 

interpretation  is  thought  to  be  unscientific.  Those  who 
take  sensation  for  thinking  lose  the  essence  of  science. 
Facts  are  valuable  for  the  sake  of  their  meaning.  A 
fact  of  nature  is  not  a  law  of  nature,  but  involves  a  law, 
comes  under  it,  illustrates  it,  and  the  law  latent  in  the 
fact  is  the  problem  which  the  fact  involves.  The  same 
is  true  of  social  facts;  we  learn  what  they  are,  and 
then  aim  to  get  their  philosophy.  The  process  is 
inductive.  The  strictest  adherence  to  reality  is  neces- 
sary in  order  to  avoid  those  fictions  which  so  often 
stand  for  actuality.  But  deduction  is  the  counterpart 
of  induction.  If  by  induction  a  law  has  been  drawn 
from  the  facts,  then  we  apply  it  in  all  cases  like  those 
in  which  it  was  discovered.  After  it  is  once  estab- 
lished, we  need  not  rediscover  the  law  of  gravitation 
before  using  it;  its  proper  application  is  our  sole  con- 
cern. If  the  exercise  of  a  social  energy  is  the  condi- 
tion of  its  development,  then  we  can  reckon  with  this 
law  without  renewed  verification.  When  law  is  used 
to  designate  only  an  order  of  phenomena,  it  must  not  be 
identified  with  cause.  The  law  of  gravity  is  a  state- 
ment, not  an  interpretation,  of  gravitation.  The  limi- 
tations of  a  law  should  be  considered.  Undue  influence 
is  attributed  to  it  when  abstracted  from  other  laws  and 
made  the  explanation  of  phenomena  which  are  the 
result  of  co-operation  with  other  laws.  To  ascribe  the 
uprising  of  laborers  to  their  industrial  condition  is  to 
miss  one  of  the  most  powerful  factors  in  the  phenom- 
enon. They  have  been  in  a  worse  condition  when  there 
was  no  uprising.  Their  agitation  is  largely  due  to 
their  own  industrial,  intellectual,  and  political  advance, 
and  to  the  prevalence  of  the  modern  ideas  of  human 
rights.  Man  must  have  bread  to  live;  but  he  has  other 
interests  than  the  bread  he  eats.     As  in  explaining  a 


244     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

chemical  compound,  all  the  elements  entering  into  the 
substance,  and  their  proportions,  must  be  found,  so 
it  is  with  all  social  phenomena.  The  analysis  must 
be  exhaustive.  Society  can  be  interpreted  only  if  all 
its  energies  and  the  co-operation  of  all  its  laws  are 
recognized. 

Unless  thoroughly  disciplined  in  philosophy,  the 
student  will  likely  need  most  help  in  discovering  the 
most  general  principles  of  Sociology.  How  can  he  dis- 
cover them  and  what  they  involve,  and  thus  get  those 
essentials  which  are  presupposed  by  the  historic  evolu- 
tion and  the  ethics  of  society  ? 

The  intelligent  use  of  "  society  "  implies  that  some 
definite  meaning  is  attached  to  the  term.  What  is  that 
meaning  ?  It  stands  for  a  specific  organism  of  ener- 
gies ;  what  are  the  characteristic  features  of  that  organ- 
ism which  distinguish  it  from  other  objects  ?  These 
are  fundamental  questions  which  must  be  answered. 
Human  society  deals  with  humanity,  but  even  with 
humanity  only  according  to  its  social  features.  This 
gives  the  exact  point  of  view.  Fix  the  attention  rigidly 
on  what  is  beyond  all  question  recognized  as  society, 
say  one  hundred  men  united  for  purposes  of  scientific 
culture.  Wbat  constitutes  this  body  of  men  a  society  ? 
The  answer  will  give  society  ^^er  sc,  in  distinction  from 
those  particular  forms  of  society  which  depend  on  time, 
place,  and  circumstances;  we  are  after  the  perma- 
nent and  essential  elements  which  exist  after  all  that 
is  accidental  and  variable  has  vanished.  All  real 
society  is  in  time  and  place,  and  has  certain  peculiar 
qualities;  but  our  aim  is  the  concept  or  idea  of  society 
which  underlies  all  actual  society,  which  is  in  all  real 
society,  but  more  than  which  all  real  society  contains. 

There  is  but  one  concept  of  society,  but  the  actual 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     245 

societies  may  have  endless  forms.  The  one  hundred 
men  might  be  increased  or  diminished,  and  the  society 
still  exist.  The  members  of  the  society  need  not  be  men ; 
some  or  all  may  be  women.  The  society  might  have 
some  other  than  an  intellectual  aim.  The  purpose, 
then,  is  not  essential.  So  the  fact  that  they  meet  at  a 
specified  time  and  in  a  particular  place  is  not  essential 
to  the  idea  of  society.  Individuals  arc  evidently  neces- 
sary. Yet  one  on  earth,  another  on  the  moon,  and  a 
third  on  Mars,  veould  not  be  regarded  as  constituting 
society.  The  one  concept  left  as  essential  is  that  of 
human  beings  in  an  associated  capacity.  But  do  wc 
consider  these  beings  as  totalities  or  only  their  social 
elements  ? 

This  association  of  human  beings  for  a  definite  pur- 
pose is  the  old  and  most  fully  recognized  conception  of 
society.  In  recent  times,  however,  the  conception  has 
been  extended  so  as  to  apply  to  persons  not  united  for 
any  definite  purpose,  nevertheless  otherwise  associated. 
Even  direct  contact  is  not  deemed  essential,  as  the 
members  of  a  large  denomination  constitute  a  society 
without  knowing  or  seeing  each  other.  It  is  in  this 
larger  conception  that  we  speak  of  humanity  as  a 
society,  the  members  having  essentially  the  same  facul- 
ties, the  same  environment,  the  same  conditions  of 
association,  and  some  actual  connection  through  fam- 
ilies or  otherwise.  One  need  but  become  conscious  of 
the  really  existing  associative  elements  among  men  in 
order  to  understand  why  we  speak  of  humanity  as 
human  society. 

Human  beings  really  associated,  whether  consciously 
or  not,  that  is  the  fundamental  concept  of  society. 
Test  the  matter.  Can  there  be  society  unless  such 
association  exists  ?     Or  can  there  be  such  association 


246     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

and  yet  no  society  ?     The  notion  of  human  beings  asso- 
ciated is  the  most  abstract  and  the  emptiest,  a  mere 
beginning,  and  yet  exceedingly  fruitful.     It  is  a  notion 
found  wherever  society  is,  and  thus  actually  inclusive 
of  all  human  association.     Our  attention,  by  means  of 
this  definition,  is  concentrated  on  human  individuals 
as  possessors  of  the  social  forces,   on  their  sociation, 
and  on  what  is  necessarily  involved  in  such  sociation. 
Men  instead  of  things  engage  our  central  thought;  we 
have  a  human  science   distinct   from  what  is   called 
natural  science,  without  professing  to  fix  man's  exact 
relation  to  nature ;  we  have  a  social  science  in  distinc- 
tion from  the  science  of  individual  man;  and  we  have 
society  as  in  this  world  and  with  a  natural  environ- 
ment.    What  are  the  individuals  whose  social  forces 
constitute  society  ?     The  view  is  from  a  social  stand- 
point, but  as  such  it  involves  human  anatomy  and  phys- 
iology, psychology,  psycho-physics,    and  anthropology, 
to  say  nothing  of  the  relation  of  these  to  biology  and 
the  other  natural  sciences.     This  psycho-physical  being 
is  to  be  taken  according  to  Avhat  he  is  socially,  his 
capabilities  and  possibilities,  in  connection  with  the 
capabilities  and   possibilities  of  his  natural  environ- 
ment, in  order  to  determine  what  the  necessary  pre- 
suppositions of  society  are.     One  need  but  grasp  the 
meaning  of  the  individual  forces  as  constituting  society, 
in  order  to  appreciate  the  vastness  of  the  study  opened 
to  us. 

To  this  must  be  added  the  idea  of  association.  What 
is  its  meaning  ?  Is  a  mere  aggregation  an  association  ? 
Is  a  mere  aggregation  of  human  beings  possible?  Are 
there  not  associative  elements  in  human  aggregation 
which  involve  more  than  an  aggregation  of  things?  It 
is  the  associative  element  we  seek  to   interpret.     It 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     247 

means  some  bond  of  union  between  the  individuals, 
some  relation  to  one  another  which  makes  them  differ- 
ent from  what  they  would  be  if  wholly  isolated.  What 
associates  men,  and  what  determines  the  character  of 
the  association  ?  Is  it  nature,  or  some  human  necessity, 
or  a  higher  voluntary  purpose  ?  Besides  the  kinds  of 
association,  we  must  consider  the  degrees  possible,  from 
the  loosest  tie  to  the  most  perfect  union.  Thus  all  the 
motives  and  powers  which  unite  men  are  involved.  A 
vast  field  is  thus  opened  which  is  but  little  cultivated. 
Let  one  but  try  to  discover  and  analyze  and  classify  and 
systematize  the  forces  which  enter  into  human  associa- 
tion, and  he  will  soon  discover  how  complicated  and 
rich  the  subject,  and  how  great  the  task  which  still 
remains  to  be  accomplished. 

This  is  but  a  beginning.  With  the  individuals  whose 
social  forces  constitute  society,  and  with  the  idea  of 
association  fully  apprehended,  what  effects  are  wrought 
by  the  association  ?  Does  the  individual  remain  inde- 
pendent, or  does  he  become  dependent  ?  Does  he  sacri- 
fice, or  gain,  or  both  ?  Is  there,  after  the  association, 
anything  besides  individuals  ?  Here  the  problem  of 
society  as  an  organism  must  be  solved.  An  organism 
of  what  ? 

We  have  already  spoken  of  man's  natural  environ- 
ment. We  must  not  abstract  men  from  their  condi- 
tions, but  must  take  them  with  those  conditions.  Men 
with  their  attachments  are  the  social  factors  in  which 
the  social  energies  inhere.  The  king  with  his  dominion, 
the  millionaire  with  his  wealth,  the  politician  with  his 
reputation,  —  all  men  must  be  taken  exactly  as  their 
possessions  and  environment  make  them.  Since  human 
power  is  so  largely  conditioned  by  natural  force,  we 
must  consider  the  influence  of  nature  on  men  associ- 


248     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ated,  and  their  effect  on  nature.  Thus  to  the  study  of 
individuals  and  of  their  association,  the  study  of  nature 
must  be  added. 

Wherever  at  any  time  or  in  any  place  society  is 
found,  the  conditions  for  the  above  analysis  are  given. 
But  suppose  that  from  society  as  empirically  given  we 
draw  the  idea  of  society joerse',  how  do  we  know  that  our 
analysis  and  synthesis  apply  to  all  society  whenever 
and  wherever  found  ?  A  flippant  empiricism  which 
knows  only  what  it  sees  and  handles,  and  does  not 
know  that,  makes  an  answer  necessary.  Some  actually 
question  the  propriety  of  announcing  principles  of  uni- 
versal application,  claiming  that  experience  is  the  limit 
of  knowledge,  and  that  what  we  thus  learn  cannot  be 
applied  to  what  we  have  not  experienced. 

If  experience  reveals  a  law,  the  universality  of  its 
application  rests  on  the  principle  given  in  the  formula 
that  A=A.  This  must  not  be  taken  in  the  usual  sense 
of  the  law  of  identity,  but  of  equality.  It  is  meaning- 
less tautology  to  say  that  A  is  A ;  but  there  is  a  rich 
application  in  the  law  that  A  equals  A,  that  every  A, 
wherever  found,  equals  every  other  A.  Suppose  that 
A  is  the  definition  of  vertebrate ;  then  whenever  you 
find  A  you  have  a  vertebrate.  A  stone  per  se  is  equal 
to  every  other  stone  per  se ;  that  is,  whatever  consti- 
tutes an  object  stone  {not  this  or  that  particular  stone) 
is  exactly  the  same  as  that  which  constitutes  any  other 
object  stone  (not  this  or  that  particular  stone).  I 
define  tree,  and  the  idea  obtained  is  the  standard  to 
which  every  object  must  conform  in  order  to  be  a  tree. 
The  fruitful  law  that  A  equals  A  is  thus  without  excep- 
tion. What  constitutes  society  per  se  now  has  always 
constituted  it  and  always  will ;  and  if  from  any  empiri- 
cal society  I  learn  what  society  itself  is,  I  have  the  idea 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     249 

of  society  as  it  must  ever  and  everywhere  be.  This 
reveals  the  importance  of  the  idea,  being  involved  in 
all  society.  It  is  this  that  gives  empirical  study  its 
greatest  value;  the  evanescent  facts  reveal  principles 
and  laws  that  are  universal  and  eternal. 

This  abstraction  of  principles  from  the  existing  asso- 
ciation of  human  beings  constitutes  the  method  for  our 
first  division.  In  these  principles  we  have  society 
potentially.  How  has  the  idea  been  actualized ;  what 
real  factors  have  the  potential  factors  become  ?  This 
leads  us  to  our  second  division,  the  social  actuality  as 
seen  in  the  process  of  historic  evolution.  Little  more 
need  be  said  on  this  subject,  as  the  different  methods 
for  considering  the  vast  material  involved  have  already 
been  indicated.  Whether  the  evolution  be  treated 
chronologically,  or  whether  we  begin  with  the  culture 
of  our  age  and  trace  its  connection  with  the  past  to  the 
beginning  of  society,  or  whether  the  development  of 
social  institutions  be  the  method  adopted,  in  each  case 
the  material  is  so  vast  and  the  intellectual  require- 
ments are  so  great  that  a  field  for  endless  research  is 
opened.  Large  generalizations  which  concentrate  the 
materials  gathered  from  all  sources  will  have  to  be 
resorted  to.  The  general  principles  on  which  all 
things  rest  are  few;  but  if  we  want  to  know  moun- 
tains we  must  consider  their  separate  peaks  as  well  as 
their  common  base.  Certain  things  are  common  to  all 
ages,  though  not  necessarily  in  an  equal  degree.  If 
ages  have  distinctive  features,  peculiar  characteristics, 
marked  types  in  thought  and  life,  the  study  of  these  is 
of  special  importance.  When  we  speak  of  a  stone,  a 
bronze,  and  an  iron  period,  we  have  in  each  case  but 
one  fact,  yet  of  such  magnitude  as  to  determine  the 
character  of  the  period.     What  meaning,  for  instance, 


250     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

in  calling  an  era  the  age  of  steam  ?  Thus  to  give  an 
age  a  name  is  to  interpret  it. 

Greece  and  Rome  are  distinct  peaks  on  the  common 
base  of  humanity ;  what  distinguishes  them  from  ori- 
ental antiquity  ?  By  means  of  their  dominant  ideas  we 
seize  the  Middle  Ages,  such  as  the  supremacy  of  dog- 
matism in  theology,  the  power  of  the  church  and  the 
hierarchy,  the  fascination  of  asceticism  and  mysticism; 
these  are  the  forces  in  the  thought  and  life,  in  the 
state  and  institutions.  Our  own  age  is  to  be  inter- 
preted by  its  all-controlling  thoughts  and  passions; 
these  are  the  keys  that  unlock  its  secrets.  The  dom- 
inant thoughts  are  like  the  fruit  in  which  the  tree  cul- 
minates, puts  its  quality,  and  most  fully  expresses 
itself.  As  we  master  society  by  obtaining  its  regnant 
ideas,  that  interminable  confusion  occasioned  by  an 
empiric  survey  of  mere  details  is  resolved  into  beauti- 
ful symmetry.  We  study  society  in  its  characteristics, 
as  industrial,  religious,  political,  literary,  assthetic, 
philosophical,  scientific,  or  recreative.  When  we  get 
the  kind  of  thought  that  dominates,  we  ask  for  its 
quality,  namely,  the  character  of  the  industry,  religion, 
et  cet.  Different  characteristics  are  found  in  the  same 
society ;  what  are  they,  what  are  their  gradations,  and 
how  do  they  blend  ?  In  this  way  society  is  made  to 
stand  before  the  mind  in  distinct  outlines,  and  is  com- 
prehended according  to  its  essentials.  I  may  not  be  able 
to  examine  the  million  trees  which  constitute  a  primi- 
tive forest ;  but  I  shall  comprehend  the  nature  of  that 
forest  if  I  know  that  it  consists  of  oak  and  poplar  and 
hickory  and  maple  and  elm  and  beech  and  walnut,  and 
at  the  same  time  know  the  character  of  these  trees. 

By  a  logical  process  we  pass  from  what  society  is 
to  what  it  ouirht  to  be.     The  method   is,  airain,  both 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     251 

empirical  and  rational ;  with  the  actuality  we  compare 
the  mind's  ideality.  From  the  reality  we  learn  what 
needs  and  evils  prevail,  what  forces  are  at  work,  and 
what  effects  they  produce.  To  the  lessons  learned 
from  history  and  observation  respecting  the  regenera- 
tive powers  of  society,  valuable  materials  are  offered 
by  philosophical  and  Christian  ethics.  But  while  the 
student  need  not  always  begin  at  the  beginning,  any 
more  in  this  than  in  the  other  divisions,  much  prepara- 
tory work  having  been  done  for  him,  he  should  always 
be  discriminating,  critical,  and  independent,  in  the  use 
of  his  materials. 

As  in  the  other  divisions  thought  is  concentrated  on 
society  per  se  and  on  its  historic  evolution,  so  in  this 
third  division  the  mind  is  concentrated  on  the  ethical 
elements  of  society.  Will  and  purpose  now  come  to 
the  front.  The  mind's  ideal  become  Will  is  the  genius 
to  transform  the  crude  social  material  into  forms  of 
beauty.  Reform  hardly  expresses  it.  Some  things  are 
to  be  reformed ;  others  are  to  be  destroyed ;  others  still 
are  to  be  developed.  Good  seeds  exist  —  unfold  them ; 
good  trees  grow  —  trim  them,  graft  on  new  scions ;  briers 
must  be  rooted  out.  Regeneration,  evolution,  revolu- 
tion, all  are  needed  for  progress.  While  will  is  pre- 
dominantly involved  in  ethics,  all  the  intellectual  and 
emotional  powers  are  associated  with  it  and  aid  in 
furthering  ethical  ends. 

In  interpreting  society  as  it  now  is  we  find  the  in- 
dustrial and  aesthetic  stages  largely  dominant.  Grati- 
fication and  the  means  of  gratification  are  leading 
purposes.  It  is  a  question  of  dominance.  Industry  and 
aesthetics  are  not  destroyed  by  ethics,  but  are  taken 
from  the  apex  and  made  steps  of  the  social  pyramid. 
Ethics  means  the  good  so  ordered  that  each  thing  is  in 


252     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

its  right  place  and  right  relation.  Here  again  we  see 
how  sociological  ethics  is  deeper  and  broader  than 
reform.  Reforms  are  apt  to  be  isolated ;  but  in  ethics 
we  have  a  system  of  regeneration,  of  evolution,  and  of 
revolution.  Reform  becomes  a  system;  the  evils  are 
found  to  be  united,  so  must  the  forces  be  that  would 
overcome  them ;  not  isolated,  but  organically  connected 
powers  must  work  for  the  improvement  of  the  social 
organism.  Thus  we  deepen  and  broaden  and  syste- 
matize our  notions  of  reform,  or  put  ethics  for  reform. 

The  scientist  cannot  always  demonstrate;  then  he 
invents  a  hypothesis  or  theory  to  account  for  the  facts, 
leaving  the  verification  to  future  ages.  Newton's  theory 
of  light  was  of  this  nature.  So  when  the  course  of  a 
planet  varies  from  the  path  it  ought  to  take  according 
to  known  conditions,  the  existence  of  another  but  un- 
known planet  causing  the  variation  may  be  postulated, 
and  afterwards  the  planet  discovered.  These  are  evi- 
dences of  the  influence  of  imagination  in  scientific 
investigations. 

A  similar  process  is  pursued  in  sociological  ethics. 
There  is  a  forecasting  of  what  ought  to  be;  but  this 
does  not  forestall  future  improvements  in  the  theory. 
No  more  in  ethics  than  in  natural  science  is  theory 
purely  imaginative;  it  is  a  construction  based  on  facts 
and  in  harmony  with  them.  Thus  in  ethics  we  deal 
with  ideals,  but  as  immediately  related  to  reality.  We 
are  tempted  to  call  it  realistic  idealism.  So  far  as  the 
material  admits  of  it,  scientific  exactness  is  the  aim. 

Careful  definition  is  no  less  important  in  ethics 
than  in  mathematics.  A  recent  discussion  has  made 
this  plain.  The  solution  of  the  labor  problem  was 
pronounced  an  unrealizable  ideal.  It  is  an  eternal 
struggle,  it  was  said,  and  this  struggle  is  held  to  be 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     253 

the  only  possible  solution.  But  why,  then,  strive  to 
solve  it  ?  We  must  distinguish  between  the  social 
problem  and  our  social  problem.  Nothing  beyond  our 
reach  is  part  of  our  social  problem.  If  it  is  settled 
that  we  cannot  square  the  circle,  then  it  is  no  longer 
problematical.  It  is  not  a  problem  how  I  can  draw 
myself  out  of  a  marsh  by  tugging  away  at  my  hair. 
Our  social  problem  in  ethics  is  what  we  can  do,  and 
only  because  we  can  solve  it  is  it  our  problem.  There 
is  an  ethical  problem  for  humanity  at  which  the  whole 
of  humanity,  throughout  all  ages,  will  be  called  to 
work,  but  there  is  also  an  ethical  problem  which  is 
peculiarly  ours. 

In  all  these  cases  we  have  hints  for  ethical  work  as 
well  as  for  study,  and  the  two  go  together.  We  aim 
at  principles  here  as  in  the  other  departments,  prin- 
ciples for  theoretic  comprehension  and  practical  appli- 
cation. General  ideas  we  want,  ideas  which  grasp  the 
details.  In  sociological  ethics  we  deal  with  the  char- 
acter of  the  social  forces,  of  the  association  they  form, 
and  of  its  environment.  The  ethical  force  in  each 
social  form  is  to  be  determined.  The  ethical  element 
in  institutions  is  important,  as  the  family,  the  church, 
and  the  state.  Education  is  one  of  the  roots;  but  is 
not  the  ethical  quality  of  mere  intellectual  attainment 
overestimated  ?  The  place  of  ethics  in  the  school,  theo- 
retical and  practical,  deserves  careful  attention.  His- 
tory shows  that  intellect  by  itself  is  not  necessarily 
regenerative ;  the  kind  of  intellect  is  the  determining 
factor.  Everywhere  the  moulding  forces  are  to  be 
seized,  such  as  literature,  laws,  politics,  economics, 
religion. 

A  study  of  the  past  and  present  puts  it  beyond  ques- 
tion that  the  ethical  process  of  society  is  not  mechan- 


254     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ical,  but  psychical.  The  changes  in  the  character  of 
society  are  inner.  The  outside  influences  may  be 
great,  and  the  modern  emphasis  on  the  environment 
indicates  progress;  but  in  intellectual,  moral,  and 
spiritual  concerns  it  is  the  mind  and  heart  and  will 
with  which  we  must  reckon.  However  external  insti- 
tutions may  be  improved,  the  improvement  of  society 
itself  is  essentially  that  of  its  individual  members,  the 
families,  and  the  other  social  groups.  The  ethically 
organic  process  is  necessarily  gradual.  Spasmodic 
efforts,  moral  spurts,  and  religious  enthusiasm,  have 
their  place,  especially  in  inaugurating  reformatory 
movements;  but  to  ethicize  humanity  requires  time. 
The  change  in  conditions  by  means  of  the  American 
and  French  revolutions  did  not  make  men  free,  equal, 
and  fraternal. 

The  estimate  of  ethical  forces  is  peculiarly  difficult. 
Not  only  are  they  deep  and  often  hidden,  but  they  per- 
tain to  the  volitions  of  men,  which  are  less  subject  to 
the  control  of  others  than  intellectual  convictions.  In 
nature  and  logic  we  deal  with  what  must  be ;  in  ethics 
with  what  ought  to  be,  but  without  the  ability  to  make 
of  that  a  necessity.  The  difficulties  in  the  subject  can 
be  inferred  from  such  problems  as  the  freedom  of  the 
will,  the  nature  of  conscience,  the  supreme  good  and 
its  attainment.  Through  ethics  we  are  introduced  into 
the  deepest  mysteries  of  the  personality.  These  mys- 
teries are  augmented  by  the  fact  that  we  deal  with 
them,  not  merely  as  found  in  individuals,  but  also  in 
the  complexity  of  the  social  organism. 

Having  now  the  divisions  })efore  us,  we  can  consider 
their  relation  to  one  another.  They  form  but  one 
social  system  and  thus  present  a  variety  in  unity.  The 
method  is  essentially  the  same   for  all  divisions,  but 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     255 

the  emphasis  differs.  The  first  division  is  formed  by 
a  process  of  abstraction,  using  society  as  it  is  for  the 
sake  of  getting  the  principles  of  all  that  society  can  be. 
Our  second  division  emphasizes  the  empirical  and  his- 
toric methods;  yet  the  same  process  of  abstraction  is 
required  as  in  the  first,  in  order  to  get  the  laws  of 
society  as  it  is  and  has  been.  The  work  is  always 
principiant.  The  third  division,  sociological  ethics, 
requires  both  the  empirical  and  the  abstract  method, 
just  as  the  other  two,  in  order  that  the  ethical  prin- 
ciples and  laws  may  be  obtained. 

So  great  is  the  variety  in  sociological  materials  that 
all  the  methods  adopted  in  scientific,  philosophical, 
and  historical  investigations  are  involved.  The  rule 
is  that  the  method  must  be  adapted  to  the  material, 
not  the  material  tortured  into  a  pet  method.  So  inti- 
mately, however,  are  the  different  departments  of 
Sociology  connected  that  while  a  particular  method 
may  be  more  prominent  in  one  than  in  the  others,  all 
the  methods  co-operate  to  construct  the  compact  system 
known  as  the  science  of  society ;  and  whatever  throws 
light  on  any  part  illuminates  the  whole  system. 

The  student  who  has  mastered  the  meaning  of  the 
sociological  method  will  know  what  estimate  to  place 
on  seeming  and  even  pretentious  explanations  which 
are  deceptions.  When  intent  on  substance,  he  cannot 
be  content  with  empty  phrases  and  merely  formal  inter- 
pretations. A  cosmical  law  to  him  is  meaningless 
until  the  nature  of  the  law  is  explained.  If  he  knows 
natural  law  only  as  a  force  that  works  blindly  and  with 
absolute  necessity,  then  he  also  knows  that  man  can 
set  an  end  toward  which  to  work,  that  he  chooses 
between  alternatives,  and  that  therefore  he  is  subject 
to  a  law  that  is  not  known  as  natural.     A  comet  mov- 


256     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ing  resistlessly  toward  the  earth  could  not,  according 
to  natural  law,  avoid  collision ;  but  if  it  moved  teleo- 
logically  and  had  the  directing  of  its  course  it  might. 
Man  can  and  does  move  thus ;  therefore  something  else 
than  natural  law  reigns  in  him.  This  distinction  must 
be  insisted  on  until  the  natural  is  transmuted  into  the 
teleological  law.  Natural  selection  among  brutes  is 
not  the  final  law  for  social  struggle.  Even  social  dem- 
ocrats now  admit  that  Lassalle's  iron  law  of  wages, 
according  to  which  wages  always  tend  to  the  level  of 
the  bare  existence  of  laborers  and  their  offspring,  the 
future  laborers,  is  not  absolute.  The  combination  of 
laborers  and  the  humanity  of  employers  may  abrogate 
it.  No  biological  theory  of  evolution  has  yet  been  dis- 
covered as  the  ultimate  law  of  human  society.  What- 
ever value  attaches  to  these  methods,  their  severe  limi- 
tations must  be  recognized. 

We  insist  in  Sociology  on  causative  interpretation. 
But  for  that  very  reason  we  reject  a  priori,  metaphysi- 
cal, and  fictitious  explanations.  The  real  causes  we  find 
in  the  social  substance.  The  social  energies  of  individ- 
uals constitute  this  substance.  The  persons  who  are 
the  possessors  of  these  energies  are  affected  by  the 
land  and  its  products  and  by  money ;  they  create  insti- 
tutions which  arc  an  embodiment  of  the  social  forces, 
and  then  these  institutions  in  turn  affect  their  creators. 
Not  as  abstractions,  therefore,  do  we  take  the  social 
energies,  but  as  affected  by  their  relations  to  things. 
Society  consists  of  the  social  energies  of  persons  subject 
to  the  most  manifold  influence. 

These  social  energies  of  persons  being  the  social  sub- 
stance, we  go  to  them  in  our  study  of  social  causation. 
Our  sociological  method  leads  us  to  inquire  what  these 
energies  are ;  what  affinities  and  repulsions  exist  be- 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     257 

tween  them;  what  the  conditions  of  their  coalescence 
and  interaction  are ;  how  they  interact ;  what  changes 
take  place  in  them  by  means  of  the  interaction; 
what  sociation  results  or  what  societies  they  form; 
and  how  the  forces  themselves  can  be  perfected,  how 
their  interaction  can  be  made  harmonious,  and  how 
their  social  product  can  be  made  the  best  possible. 

The  social  energies  as  the  social  substance  (the  anat- 
omy and  physiology  of  the  social  organism,  the  founda- 
tion of  the  social  superstructure)  constitute  our  first 
division. 

The  social  energies  as  they  unfold  the  actual  or  his- 
toric societies  (their  social  genesis  or  evolution)  con- 
stitute our  second  division. 

The  social  energies  developed  according  to  the  per- 
fection of  the  potentiality  involved  in  them  (ideal 
social  progress,  sociological  ethics)  constitute  our  third 
division. 

This  recapitulation  gives  the  substance  with  which 
in  every  instance  our  causative  method  deals. 

A  man  without  a  method  has  been  called  "  a  vessel  without  a 
rudder,"  Sir  William  Hamilton  says,  "  All  method  is  a  rational 
progress  —  a  progress  toward  an  end." 

It  is  a  correct  observation  that  in  general  men  care  more  to  do  a 
thing  than  to  know  how  it  is  done.  But  for  the  student  to  know 
how  to  do  a  thing  is  the  condition  for  the  best  intellectual  work. 
This  simply  means  that  instead  of  haphazard  efforts  and  a  waste  of 
energy'  he  is  to  be  fully  conscious  of  self  and  his  subject,  and  master 
of  his  powers  and  of  the  materials  on  which  he  works.  Socrates, 
Bacon,  and  Kant  made  epochs  in  thought  by  directing  attention  to 
the  methods  of  research  and  pointing  out  the  way  that  leads  to 
truth. 

There  is  a  peculiar  fascination  in  comprehensive  generalizations 
and  universal  laws,  so  that  their  mere  statement  may  insure  their 
acceptance.  Rigid  criticism  should  be  the  rule,  in  order  to  deter- 
mine the  correctness  of  the  generalization  and  the  sphere  of  the 

17 


258     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

application  of  the  law.  If,  for  instance,  claims  are  made  for  a  law 
as  cosmical,  it  should  be  determined  what  is  meant  by  cosmical : 
whether  it  is  held  that  the  law  works  on  all  occasions  or  only  under 
certain  circumstances  ;  whether  it  is  isolated  or  works  in  conjunc- 
tion with  other  laws.  It  may  also  be  a  legitimate  inquiry  whether 
the  law  is  found  by  an  a  priori  method,  or  is  the  result  of  an  actual 
investigation  of  the  cosmos.  Has  the  whole  cosmos  been  traversed 
or  only  a  part  ?  Especially  when  cosmical  laws  are  promulgated  in 
the  name  of  an  empiricism  which  denounces  speculation  have  we  a 
right  to  know  the  authority  for  an  afih-mation  which  puts  into  one 
monistic  formula  all  that  pertains  to  matter  and  mind.  The  law 
may  be  correct,  but  we  want  to  know  whether  it  is  correct. 

In  social  science  the  difficulties  of  method  are  much  greater  than 
in  the  study  of  natural  science.  This  is  due  to  the  nature  of  the 
material.  Sociology  deals  with  facts  behind  which  there  is  a  world 
of  thought  and  feeling  and  volition,  which  is  not  subject  to  direct 
observation.  Human  phenomena  often  hide  rather  than  reveal 
the  motives  of  men. 

To  observe  correctly  objects  of  nature  is  itself  an  art  learned  only 
after  long  scientific  discipline.  Scientists  have  argued  that  mathe- 
matics and  the  study  of  nature  ought  to  take  the  place  of  the 
classics  in  a  collegiate  course,  in  order  that  the  student's  power  of 
scientific  observation  may  be  the  better  developed.  Special  train- 
ing is  also  required  for  correct  observation  in  the  human  disciplines. 
The  study  of  mathematics  and  nature,  it  has  been  claimed,  does 
not  prepare  directly  for  the  complicated  psychical  processes  of 
society.  They  must  be  studied  in  the  human  disciplines ;  and  in 
the  study  of  these  the  mind  must  be  trained  for  social  observation. 

Observation,  however,  is  only  the  first  step.  What  is  observed 
is  also  to  be  interpreted.  Not  the  bare  fact  is  ultimate  for  the 
sociologist;  he  wants  to  know  its  secrets,  what  it  involves,  what 
has  caused  it,  whither  it  tends,  how  it  is  related  to  other  facts,  and 
what  law  works  in  it.  A  single  fact  requires  a  many-sided  inter- 
pretation of  thought;  but  we  have  a  whole  universe  of  facts  to 
be  mastered,  all  related,  intricately  interwoven,  co-operating,  and 
antagonizing.  The  magnitude  of  the  task  presented  impresses 
us  too  deeply  with  our  limitations  to  permit  the  spirit  of  dogmatism 
to  prevail. 

Not  as  in  nature  can  we  isolate  phenomena  in  Sociology.  No 
particular  social  force  is  alone,  as  nitrogen  or  oxygen  may   be. 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY      259 

Therefore  our  social  analysis  does  not  give  us  distinct,  sharply 
separated  entities,  as  natural  science.  Whatever  isolation  is  possi- 
ble in  social  studj^  the  analysis  is  always  for  the  sake  of  the  most 
comprehensive  synthesis,  —  a  task  still  more  difficult  than  the 
analysis  of  a  particular  social  phenomenon. 

Our  method  aims  at  nothing  less  than  humanity  in  its  asso- 
ciated capacity.  By  means  of  observation  and  from  history  we 
seek  to  draw  inferences  respecting  humanity  as  a  society.  But 
never  can  we  observe  all  facts  now  occurring,  or  master  all  the 
events  of  history.  Therefore  a  complete  knowledge  of  the  facts 
never  can  constitute  the  basis  of  our  inferences.  Our  inductions 
being  incomplete,  we  cannot  claim  demonstrations,  but  must  be 
content  with  hypotheses  or  theories,  which  are  always  to  be  held 
liable  to  correction  by  new  facts  of  observation  and  history. 
Nevertheless,  certain  facts  are  so  numerous  and  invariable  as  to 
give  a  basis  for  valid  inferences  of  a  general  character.  So  many 
evidences,  for  instance,  exist  to  prove  men  self -regarding  that  we 
cannot  question  that  this  is  a  potent  force  in  human  conduct.  For 
many  things  we  can  claim  an  approach  to  law,  if  not  the  establish- 
ment of  the  law  itself. 

Another  factor  is  to  be  noted.  We  do  not  contemplate  with  the 
same  degree  of  impartiality  human,  as  we  do  natural,  objects.  The 
former  lie  nearer  self-interest,  appeal  to  prejudice  and  passion,  and 
may  be  seriously  affected  by  traditionalism  and  dogmatism.  The 
testimony  in  courts,  and  narratives  of  the  same  event  show  with 
what  allowance  judgments  respecting  human  affairs  must  be  taken. ^ 

The  genetic  method  is  pursued  in  all  historical  investigation. 
To  trace  a  single  social  force,  as  that  of  economics  or  aesthetics,  is 
beset  with  difficulties  on  account  of  the  numerous  factors  involved 
and  the  hidden  processes  of  which  the  phenomena  are  but  imper- 
fect manifestations.  What  varied  motives,  besides  that  of  a  liveli- 
hood, may  enter  into  business  ?     And  who  is  prepared  to  interpret 

1  The  eminent  historian  Leopold  von  Ranke  was  so  deeply  impressed  with 
the  need  of  a  thorough  criticism  of  historical  documents  in  order  to  get  at  the 
truth,  that  he  laid  it  down  as  a  rule  that,  so  far  as  possible,  we  must  go  behind 
the  records  to  learn  the  character  of  their  authors.  Such  questions  as  these  are 
fundamental:  Did  the  author  want  to  tell  the  trutli  ?  Was  he  biased  or  con- 
trolled by  self-interest  and  class  preferences  ?  Was  he  competent  to  judge  of 
what  he  wrote?  Were  the  facts  within  his  reach,  and  did  he  make  a  faithful  use 
of  them  V  In  order  to  learn  the  truth,  therefore,  we  must  go  beyond  the  records 
to  a  study  of  the  character  of  their  authors. 


260     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  art  impulse  from  its  rudest  beginnings  in  savage  life  to  the 
highest  creations  of  genius  ? 

Even  physical  facts  affecting  society  may  be  obscure  on  account 
of  the  variety  of  possible  causes.  Psycho-physical  ones  are  much 
more  difficult  on  account  of  the  mysteries  in  the  connection  of  body 
and  mind.  To  these  must  be  added  the  psychical  facts  which  are 
the  immediate  results  of  individual  action  in  society.  Then  we  have 
the  endless  interactions  and  complications  of  what  are  distinc- 
tively social  forces.  It  is  the  entire  social  web,  with  its  many  un- 
seen threads,  which  the  sociologist  seeks  to  comprehend.  If  he 
follows  a  single  thread  or  unravels  the  web,  he  fails  to  get  the  total- 
ity he  wants  to  seize.  The  more  microscopic  his  investigations, 
the  more  liable  he  is  to  miss  the  great  conception  of  Sociology. 
Only  by  connecting  the  largest  synthesis  with  the  closest  analysis 
can  he  hope  even  approximately  to  gain  his  end. 

From  the  investigations  of  Siissmilch,  particularly  since  the 
time  of  Quetelet,  the  statistical  method  has  been  used  in  human 
affairs.  Numerous  scholars  have  in  recent  years  tried  to  develop 
it  into  a  science  and  to  fix  its  exact  apjplication  to  social  phe- 
nomena. Since  it  deals  with  figures,  its  exactness  has  been 
emphasized.  Its  value  is  great,  but  often  its  services  have  been 
overestimated.  As  it  contemplates  masses  and  seeks  averages  in 
their  movements,  it  frequently  gives  facts  of  a  general  and  barren 
character.  It  may  show  that  more  male  than  female  children  are 
born,  that  suicides  are  specially  numerous  in  Saxony  and  contigu- 
ous regions,  and  that  there  is  a  singular  regularity  in  actions 
which  seem  hardly  subject  to  law;  yet  of  the  causes,  the  very 
things  we  want  most  to  know,  no  revelations  are  given.  In  moral 
statistics  the  number  of  crimes  punished  may  be  known,  while  the 
number  actually  committed  and  the  reasons  for  their  committal 
may  be  unknown.  The  heart  and  its  motives  are  not  subject  to 
mathematical  calculations.  This  applies  to  religious  as  well  as 
to  moral  statistics.  If  a  score  of  men  at  the  age  of  sixty  apply 
annually  for  admission  to  an  alms-house,  the  mere  statement  of 
fact  reveals  nothing  but  so  much  poverty  in  old  age.  They  are 
feeble  and  cannot  support  themselves.  What  we  are  most  anxious 
to  learn  is,  why  they  are  poor  and  feeble.  Are  the  causes  due  to 
heredity,  to  tiie  natural  environment,  to  the  individual,  or  to 
society?  Must  we  look  to  accident  or  misfortune  for  the  explana- 
tion, to  the  failure  of  crops  or  to  business  crises,  to  indolence  or 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     261 

intemperance  ?  Which  of  the  hundreds  of  causes  of  feebleness  and 
poverty  were  the  effective  ones  in  these  particular  cases  ?  Highly, 
then,  as  we  value  statistics,  its  limitations  are  manifest,  and  it 
must  usually  be  coupled  with  other  investigations  in  order  to 
furnish  the  social  facts  most  of  all  desired.^ 

Not  by  rejecting  empiricism,  but  by  making  it  the  means  for 
rational  interpretation  shall  we  secure  the  best  results.  Buckle 
says :  "  For  one  person  who  can  think,  there  are  at  least  a  hundred 
persons  who  can  observe.  An  accurate  observer  is,  no  doubt,  rare ; 
but  an  accurate  thinker  is  far  rarer."  Besides  observers  we  have 
memorizers  —  both  mere  empirics.  It  has  been  declared  that  our 
whole  culture  aims  merely  at  reproduction.  In  view  of  this  it  has 
been  said  :  "  Teach  men  to  think,  not  what  has  been  thought." 

Every  student  of  Sociology  should  enter  upon  original  research. 
For  this  his  own  environment  offers  abundant  material.  Let  him 
take  the  social  groups  to  which  he  himself  belongs  and  give  their 
philosophy.  In  a  lower  stage  of  culture  social  groups  are  limited  ; 
in  the  progress  of  culture  these  groups  increase,  interests  are 
multiplied,  and  the  relations  of  men  are  enlarged.  The  powers, 
the  interests,  the  relations  of  a  man  of  cultui'e  far  surpass  those  of 
the  uncultured.  What,  now,  are  the  relations  of  a  man  of  culture  ? 
Analyze  the  sphere  of  his  thought,  his  feeling,  his  activity.  What 
determines  his  social  relations?  What  are  the  associative  ele- 
ments ?  What  effect  is  produced  on  him  by  association,  and  what 
influence  does  he  exert  ?  The  dominant  ideas  of  groups,  of  nations, 
of  stages  of  culture  are  of  special  value  for  interpreting  society. 
How  are  formal  organizations  related  to  unorganized  groups? 
There  are  numerous  social  organisms,  and  all  must  be  understood 
in  order  to  interpret  a  community,  a  state,  or  a  nation.  Some 
associations  have  little  coherence,  they  approach  mere  aggrega- 
tions; others  are  more  like  organisms,  but  even  in  these  great 
differences  prevail  with  respect  to  the  closeness  of  the  union  of  the 
members.  The  numerous  kinds  of  association  must  be  studied 
separately,  but  also  in  their  relations  and  interaction,  as  a  totality 
or  social  unity.  By  this  method  our  present  vague,  general, 
empty,  and  abstract  conception  of  society  will  become  rich  in 
content,  a  counterpart  of  the  social  actuality.  We  should  never 
forget  that  we  want  social  thought  for  the  sake  of  the  social 
actuality  for  which  it  stands. 

^  For  moral  statistics  the  work  of  Ottingen,  "  Moralstatistik,"  is  valuable. 


262     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

While  methodology  teaches  the  true  method,  it  also  guards 
against  false  ones.  A  method  may  be  chosen  hastily  and  be  with- 
out reason ;  a  method  with  limited  application  may  be  applied  to 
objects  foreign  to  it ;  systems  are  formed  before  the  preliminary 
investigations  justify  them ;  and  thus  processes  are  made  absolute 
and  final  which  are  one-sided  and  defective.  The  history  of 
philosophy  and  science  teaches  that  men  may  become  slaves  of 
their  methods,  and  deceive  themselves  as  well  as  others.  The 
same  lesson  is  taught  by  the  development  of  Sociology  from 
Comte  to  the  present  time.  The  method  which  a  trained  sociolo- 
gist adopts  as  the  result  of  his  investigations  may  seem  to  have 
sufficient  reason  and  yet  be  faulty.  For  a  beginner  to  adopt  it 
without  critical  investigation  would  be  mere  dogmatism.  Method 
and  system  are  tools,  not  chains. 

Our  ethical  convictions  do  not  permit  us  to  expei'iment  with 
society  as  we  do  with  brutes  in  vivisection  or  otherwise,  solely  for 
the  sake  of  investigation.  No  human  being  is  to  be  reduced  to 
mere  means  for  the  sake  of  learning  lessons  for  the  benefit  of 
others.  Nevertheless,  experiments  are  constantly  made  in  politics, 
political  economy,  reform,  and  in  other  departments,  and  valuable 
lessons  may  be  drawn  from  them.  The  difficulties,  however,  are 
all  but  insurmountable.  Social  phenomena  cannot  be  isolated, 
modified,  subjected  to  numerous  tests,  and  observed  at  different 
times  and  by  different  investigators  under  the  same  conditions. 
The  peculiar  conditions  of  a  given  time  may  never  occur  again,  and 
it  may  be  impossible  to  determine  how  far  the  same  do  occur 
again.  This  makes  it  seem  as  if  exactness  could  be  obtained  only 
in  the  form  of  abstractions,  not  in  concrete  reality.  Therefore 
the  attainment  of  social  and  historic  laws  is  so  difficult,  and  many 
have  declared  them  impossible.  For  this  reason  the  student  may 
find  it  of  greatest  service  to  seek  what  is  customary,  typical,  of 
general,  if  not  of  universal,  application. 

The  importance  of  mechanical  law  in  human  society  can  be 
fully  recognized  without  reducing  that  society  to  a  mechanism. 
Instead  of  explaining  all  social  phenomena  in  this  way,  the  expla- 
nation often  seems  to  be  hindered.  The  mind  is  immediately  con- 
scious of  a  vast  number  of  human  objects,  of  ideas  and  emotions 
and  purposes,  which  are  not  explained  by  introducing  from  the 
external  world  matter,  force,  and  motion,  but  which,  by  this 
method,  actually  seem  to  lose  much  of  their  content  and  quality. 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     263 

Our  very  conception  of  force  may  have  its  source  in  the  will,  so 
that  it  is  an  inner  and  mental  phenomenon  which  we  transfer  to 
the  external  world  and  to  matter. 

The  law  of  equality,  A=A,  is  discussed  in  the  author's  "  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  Philosophy,"  215-218. 

"On  the  Difference  between  Physical  and  Moral  Law"  see' 
a  work  with  that  title  by  William  Arthur. 

Wundt,  "Logik,"  II.,  500-012,  gives  an  elaborate  discussion 
of  the  method  of  the  social  sciences.  Dilthey,  "  Einleitung  in 
die  Geisteswissenschaften."  Menger,  "  Untersuchuugen  Uber  die 
Methode  der  Socialwissenschaften."  A  good  review  of  the  last 
in  Schmoller's  "Zur  Litteraturgeschichte  der  Staats- und  Social- 
wissenschaften." 

Schiiffle,  in  "  Zeitschrift  fiir  Staatswissenschaft,"  beginning  in 
1876,  gives  a  series  of  valuable  articles  on  the  relation  of  Dar- 
winism to  social  science;  Gustav  Cohn,  "  Grundlegmig  der  Na- 
tionaldkonomie,"  first  chapter,  gives  an  account  of  method  in 
the  social  sciences. 

Professor  Giddings  discusses  "  The  Methods  of  Sociology  "  in 
the  third  chapter  of  Book  I. 

In  a  Supplementary  Number  of  "The  American  Journal  of 
Sociology,"  May,  1897,  Dr.  J.  H.  Hyslop  has  a  paper  on  "  The 
Science  of  Sociology."  It  is  a  keen  criticism  of  Professor  Gid- 
dings' method  and  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  general  subject 
of  method  in  Sociology. 

On  the  importance  of  method  see  the  author's  "  Tendencies  in 
German  Thought,"  Lecture  9,  on  "  The  Purpose  and  the  Method 
of  the  Scholar  and  the  Thinker."  Also  Chapter  X.  in  his  "  Intro- 
duction to  the  Study  of  Philosophy." 

Where  there  is  a  teacher  of  Sociology  it  can  be  left  to  him 
to  direct  students  in  the  continuance  of  their  sociological  studies 
and  in  making  independent  researches.  For  such  as  have  not  the 
advantage  of  a  teacher  to  guide  them,  a  method  for  further  study 
is  here  proposed. 

Method  for  Independent  Sociological  Research. 

The  preceding  pages  can  have  left  no  doubt  that  in 
sociological  inquiry  the  student  is  largely  thrown  upon 
his  own  resources.     In  his  motives  for  associating  with 


264     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

his  fellow-men  he  will  find  the  key  to  many  of  the  asso- 
ciative forces  of  humanity  in  all  ages.  Society  in 
general  is  beheld  in  his  social  action,  and  in  his  rela- 
tions in  the  family,  the  community,  the  church,  the 
state,  and  voluntary  organizations.  In  differentiating 
his  private  from  his  social  affairs,  distinguishing  be- 
tween himself  as  social  and  extra-social,  he  learns  to 
discern  the  individual  or  private  from  the  social 
personality. 

With  this  study  of  himself  in  society,  in  which  he 
likewise  studies  the  social  relations  of  others,  he  nat- 
urally connects  personal  investigations  into  the  asso- 
ciations of  his  environment.  For  this  purpose  the  plan 
of  the  study  of  a  community,  at  the  close  of  the  volume, 
gives  directions.  When  this  inquiry  is  made  scientific, 
it  will  become  the  basis  of  all  further  investigations. 
This  personal  scientific  research  is  especially  lacking 
in  various  sociological  works,  for  which  no  compensa- 
tion can  be  found  in  the  statistics  and  researches  of 
others. 

We  place  this  kind  of  investigation  first,  but  it  is 
not  to  be  isolated.  The  student  should  also  learn 
from  other  investigators,  especially  from  sociologists. 
Among  the  best  services  which  can  be  rendered  him  is 
to  give  directions  in  the  use  of  sociological  literature. 

References  to  works  in  the  preceding  pages  may  be 
a  general  guide.  Every  good  sociological  book  refers 
to  literature  on  the  subject,  and  in  this  way  the  student 
can  learn  what  to  read.  The  different  standpoints  of 
sociologists  and  the  confusion  reigning  in  their  specialty 
make  it  difficult  to  say  definitely  what  books  are  best. 
Scores  can  be  recommended  as  valuable ;  but  every 
one  should  bo  read  critically.  They  furnish  important 
materials,  give  excellent  suggestions,  and  are  very  ser- 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     265 

viceable  to  independent  thinkers.     They  will  be  found 
far  more  valuable  as  aids  than  as  authorities. 

The  student  is  likely  to  find  that,  after  a  general  idea 
of  Sociology  has  been  attained,  his  best  work  can  be 
done  by  specialization ;  that  is,  by  taking  special  socio- 
logical themes  and  mastering  them.  For  this  study  by 
limited  subjects  all  the  most  important  sociological 
works  can  be  used,  taking  from  each  what  bears  on  the 
particular  subject  in  hand.  In  this  way  clearness  and 
thoroughness  may  be  gained ;  and  if  the  totality  aimed 
at  in  Sociology  is  kept  in  view,  the  specialization  will 
also  promote  comprehensiveness. 

If  there  is  any  doubt  in  his  mind  respecting  the 
meaning,  the  scope,  and  the  subject-matter  of  Soci- 
ology, he  should  first  of  all  concentrate  his  energies 
on  their  interpretation.  He  must  understand  them  in 
order  to  insure  his  further  progress ;  they  are  an  in- 
troduction to  the  whole  discipline.  We  recommend 
the  following  books,  confining  ourselves  to  works  in 
English,  though  for  the  best  results  French  and  German 
are  also  necessary.  Many  of  these  are,  however,  trans- 
lated into  English.  The  first  here  named  belongs  to 
this  class,  Comte's  "Positive  Philosophy,"  translated 
by  H.  Martineau,  the  last  book,  which  treats  of  "  Social 
Physics."  Spencer's  "The  Study  of  Sociology"  is 
important  on  account  of  general  suggestions  on  Soci- 
ology and  its  study,  but  its  chief  value  probably  con- 
sists in  the  discussion  of  the  various  kinds  of  bias 
which  interfere  with  the  discovery  of  truth.  He  dis- 
cusses the  subject-matter  and  scope  of  Sociology  in  the 
first  volume  of  his  "Principles  of  Sociology,"  pp.  3-43 
and  454-618.  Ward's  "Social  Dynamics,"  Introduc- 
tion, Fairbanks'  "Introduction  to  Sociology,"  pp.  1-44, 
Giddings'  "Principles  of  Sociology,"  pp.  3-51.     Other 


^66     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

parts  of  the  last  three  works  named  are  important  for 
Sociology  in  general,  as  well  as  for  specific  departments. 

From  a  definite  conception  of  Sociology  and  society 
the  student  can  proceed  to  investigate  the  social  actu- 
ality. For  this  various  methods  have  already  been 
given.  Ethnologists  have  been  mentioned  who  give  an 
account  of  early  society.  For  an  introduction  into  this 
subject  the  following  are  recommended :  E.  B,  Tylor, 
"  Primitive  Culture,"  and  "  Early  History  of  Mankind ; " 
Sir  John  Lubbock,  "The  Origin  of  Civilization  and 
the  Primitive  Condition  of  Man;"  L.  H.  Morgan, 
"Ancient  Society,  or  Researches  in  the  Lines  of  Human 
Progress  from  Savagery,  through  Barbarism  to  Civiliza- 
tion;" D.  Wilson,  "Prehistoric  Man,  Researches  into 
the  Origin  of  Civilization  in  the  Old  and  the  New 
World."  On  the  "Religions  of  Primitive  People,"  a 
new  work,  by  D.  G.  Brinton,  has  just  appeared.  In  the 
first  volume  of  Ratzel's  "History  of  Mankind  "  an  ex- 
cellent summary  of  the  results  of  the  researches  into 
primitive  peoples  is  given.  The  works  of  Max  Miiller 
on  language  and  religion  are  so  well  known  that  the 
mention  of  them  is  hardly  necessary. 

The  student  cannot  be  at  a  loss  respecting  excellent 
works  on  social  institutions.  Most  of  the  material  in 
Mr.  Spencer's  three  volumes  on  "Principles  of  Soci- 
ology "  pertains  to  them.  In  Bascom's  "  Social  Theory  " 
Customs,  Economics,  Civics,  Ethics,  and  Religion  are 
discussed.  Fairbanks'  "Introduction"  has  chapters  on 
The  Industrial  Organization  of  Society,  The  Family 
as  the  Social  Unit,  and  The  State.  The  special  sci- 
ences abound  in  works  on  the  same  subjects,  such  as 
economics  and  political  science.  For  the  historic  view 
of  the  family  the  work  of  E.  Westermarck  on  "The 
History  of  Human  Mai-riage  "  is  important.     The  two 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE   STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     267 

volumes  of  E.  J.  Siincox  on  "  Primitive  Civilizations  " 
treat  more  especially  of  industrial  institutions.  The 
various  works  of  H.  S.  Maine  are  valuable,  especially 
"  Lectures  on  the  Early  History  of  Institutions ; " 
"Ancient  Law,  its  Connection  with  the  Early  History 
of  Society,  and  its  Relation  to  Modern  Ideas ; "  and 
"Village  Communities  in  the  East  and  West." 

We  have  already  intimated  that  the  exclusive  study 
of  institutions  or  a  one-sided  emphasis  on  them  inter- 
feres with  that  organic  view  of  society  as  a  totality 
which  is  so  essential  to  Sociology.  Where  is  the  con- 
necting bond,  the  underlying  unity,  if  each  institution 
is  to  be  considered  by  itself  ?  In  that  case  Sociology 
loses  its  mission  because  the  special  social  sciences  can 
do  its  work. 

The  common  use  of  "  social  "  (like  the  German  gesellig) 
does  not  apply  to  institutional  society,  but  to  the  more 
free,  spontaneous  intercourse  of  the  people.  Aside 
from  the  family,  the  church,  the  state,  and  voluntary 
organizations,  there  are  countless  motives  and  reasons 
for  men  to  associate  with  one  another,  such  as  affection 
and  friendship,  mutual  sympathy  and  interest,  desire 
for  companionship  and  amusement.  Not  only  are  the 
motives  for  such  unrestrained  associations  precious, 
but  they  also  lead  to  numerous  gatherings  and  are  the 
occasion  of  much  social  activity.  In  some  respects 
this  kind  of  social  life  is  more  important  than  that  of 
institutions.  In  it  humanity  manifests  itself,  while  in 
the  institutional  life  there  is  more  formality  and  more 
legality. 

This  vast  and  multiform  unorganized  social  life  pre- 
sents greater  difficulties  to  the  student  than  the  definite 
institutions.  Its  importance,  however,  is  manifest. 
Sometimes  governments  suppress  formal  organizations ; 


268     ISTRODUCTION   TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

then  the  people  have  only  their  social  gatherings  to 
give  expression  to  themselves.  Here  we  find  the  folk 
lore,  cherished  beliefs,  traditions,  manners  and  cus- 
toms, proverbs  and  songs.  What  other  parliament  have 
the  people  of  Russia  to-day  for  the  expression  of  their 
views  ?  French  society  has  had  its  celebrities,  and  its 
influence  has  been  great.  The  same  is  true  of  England 
and  Germany  and  other  countries.  This  society  no  one 
takes  as  an  institution.  No  theme,  no  interest  was 
foreign  to  it ;  seditions  were  fomented  and  revolutions 
incited.  To  this  universal  forum  of  the  people  we  must 
add,  as  also  extra-institutional,  court  circles  with  their 
intrigues,  and  what  is  called  polite,  fashionable,  aristo- 
cratic society. 

How  can  the  student  investigate  this  department  of 
Sociology  ?  Histories  of  civilization,  like  that  of  Guizot, 
will  aid  him;  the  histories  of  different  peoples  also 
contain  numerous  references  to  the  subject.  Interest- 
ing glimpses  are  given  in  works  on  French  history  from 
the  time  of  Louis  XIV.  till  the  Revolution  and  later. 
For  English  society  "Social  England,"  edited  by  H.  D. 
Trail,  is  good.  Frequently,  however,  we  have  to  resort 
to  letters,  biographies,  and  magazines,  for  the  desired 
information.  To  the  written  social  history  the  unor- 
ganized society  of  humanity  is  similar  to  what  the 
individual's  sub-conscious  activity  is  to  his  conscious 
life.  Fortunately,  this  kind  of  society  can  be  per- 
sonally investigated  by  the  student,  and  he  may  render 
excellent  service  by  formulating  its  principles  and  laws. 

Another  important  and  much  neglected  sphere,  for 
understanding  which  the  student  will  also  depend 
mainly  on  his  own  researches,  is  the  social  study  of 
the  age.  The  last  chapter  in  the  volume  aims  to  lead 
him  into  the  subject. 


TBE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     269 

Numerous  ethical  works  of  recent  date  are  valuable 
for  the  sociological  student.  Some  of  them  devote 
much  space  to  social  ethics.  Spencer's  two  volumes, 
"Data  of  Ethics,"  are  well  known.  In  connection  with 
them  and  the  ethics  of  evolutionists  generally  the  work 
of  C.  M.  Williams  can  be  read,  "A  Review  of  the  Sys- 
tems of  Ethics  founded  on  the  Theory  of  Evolution." 
The  following  are  recommended :  J.  L.  Mackenzie, 
"  Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy ;  "  Leslie  Stephen, 
"  The  Science  of  Ethics ; "  H.  Sidgwick,  "  The  Method 
of  Ethics ; "  James  Seth,  "  A  Study  of  Ethical  Prin- 
ciples;" W.  Wundt,  "The  Facts  of  the  Moral  Life;" 
B.  P.  Bowne,  "The  Principles  of  Ethics;"  J.  H.  Muir- 
head,  "The  Elements  of  Ethics." 

There  is,  however,  as  yet  no  sociological  ethics,  its 
right  to  existence  even  being  disputed. 

The  plan  here  outlined  will  lead  the  student  into  all 
departments  of  Sociology.  The  books  named  here  and 
in  other  parts  of  the  volume  contain  numerous  refer- 
ences to  works  in  different  languages,  of  which  no  men- 
tion is  made  in  this  volume.  Indeed,  such  a  wealth  of 
material  and  literature  will  be  at  his  command  that  he 
will  find  difficulty  in  using  it  all. 

Much  literature  exists  outside  of  works  regarded  as 
direct  sociological  aids.  History,  as  we  have  seen, 
teems  with  the  most  important  revelations  respecting 
society.  It  is  the  repository  of  social  forces  and  social 
forms.  Coming  to  its  study  from  the  sociological  point 
of  view,  the  student  will  find  in  history  numerous  social 
agencies,  activities,  and  trends,  which  were  overlooked 
in  former  times.  Historic  social  study  is  actually 
obscured  by  thrusting  into  the  foreground  the  myriads 
of  individuals  with  which  we  know  not  what  to  do. 
But  by  putting  individuals  in  their  proper  place,  by 


270     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

attributing  to  historic  personages  the  influence  they 
actually  exerted,  and  by  giving  to  social  forces  the 
emphasis  due  to  them,  a  correct  conception  of  historic 
society  is  formed.  There  are  countless  ages  in  which 
there  is  no  record  of  a  single  individual ;  not  to  this, 
however,  is  due  the  obscurity  of  prehistoric  times,  but 
to  the  fact  that  our  knowledge  of  the  social  forces  at 
work  is  so  imperfect.  Yet  we  have  some  idea  of  early 
society,  proving  that  our  social  knowledge  does  not 
depend  on  a  knowledge  of  individuals.  Even  in  the 
thousands  of  years  properly  called  historic,  compara- 
tively few  individuals  are  mentioned.  History  is  an 
account  of  the  interaction  of  social  forces,  and  as  such 
it  is  to  be  studied. 

Historic  literature  is  therefore  one  of  the  richest 
mines  for  sociological  inquiry.  From  it  great  human 
and  social  characteristics  can  1)C  learned :  forces,  asso- 
ciations, and  tendencies  common  to  society  in  general. 
The  same  motives  are  beheld  in  their  activity  amid  an 
endless  variety  of  circumstances.  While  all  human 
history  is  important  for  the  sociologist,  certain  parts 
are  specially  valuable,  such  as  crises  and  transition 
eras  like  our  own,  epochs,  the  introduction  of  new 
social  types  or  forces,  periods  when  great  interests 
clash  and  momentous  decisions  arc  made,  when  intense 
feeling,  vigorous  thinking,  and  resolute  action  reveal 
society  in  the  utmost  tension.  In  the  more  ordinary 
periods  of  historic  quiet  the  conditions  of  social  stag- 
nation, retrogression,  and  progress  can  likewise  be 
studied.  "We  are  getting  histories  of  the  people,  and 
they  promise  to  be  of  special  importance. 

It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  student  will  not  be  a 
mere  accumulator  of  facts  or  lose  himself  in  distrac- 
tions.    Only  by  means  of  classification  and  system  can 


THE  METHOD  IN  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     271 

he  make  his  studies  successful.  Enough  has  been  said 
to  warn  him  against  hasty  generalizations  and  the  estab- 
lishment of  laws  where  only  rules  are  warranted. 

REFLECTIONS. 

Meaning  of  Method.  Value.  Scientific  Method.  Gen- 
etic Method.  Speculative  Method.  Psychological  Method. 
Sociological  Method.  Natural  and  Social  Laws.  Facts  and 
their  Interpretation.  Facts  and  Laws.  The  Problem  in  Facts. 
The  Influence  of  the  Environment  and  of  the  Struggle 
for  Existence  in  different  Stages  of  Culture.  The  Principle 
of  Identity  and  of  Equality.  Psychology  and  Philosophy  de- 
posited in  History.  Nature  furnishes  what  is,  the  Actuality  ; 
whence  then  the  Ideals  or  the  Distinction  betw^een  w^hat  is 
and  what  ought  to  be  ?  "Working  in  the  Present  for  the  Fu- 
ture. Forecasting.  Mechanical  Processes  and  Ethics.  The 
Intellectual  Factor  in  Progress.  Induction  and  Deduction 
in  Sociology.  Union  of  the  Scientific  and  the  Philosophical 
Methods.  Different  Methods  for  different  Kinds  of  Material 
in  Sociology.  Statistics  ;  Value  and  Limitation.  Review 
of  the  Discussion  of  Method.  Analyze  the  Plan  for  Inde- 
pendent Sociological  Research. 


272     INTRODUCTION  TO  ^TUUY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  rX. 

IS    SOCIOLOGY    A    SCIENCE? 

The  Problem.  The  term  "  science  "  is  used  so  vaguely 
and  loosely  that  it  must  he  defined  in  order  to  determine 
its  sense.  Methods  and  disciplines  are  sometimes  termed 
scientific  because  that  designation  is  supposed  to  confer 
on  them  absoluteness  and  finality.  Then  we  are  told 
that  even  in  the  natural  sciences^  as  chemistry,  botany, 
geology,  physiology,  ive  cannot  have  science  in  the  same 
sense  as  in  algebra  and  geometry.  We  determine  to 
make  everything  scientific  because  that  means  exactness  ; 
then  we  are  staggered  by  the  infor7nation  that  there  are 
"  inexact "  sciences.  Would  it  not  be  better  to  eliminate 
the   inexact  from   the  scientific? 

How  is  the  question  of  the  scientific  character  of  Sociol- 
ogy to  be  determined  ?  One  need  but  look  at  much  that 
vaunts  itself  as  science  in  our  day  to  learn  what  un- 
scientific methods  are  resorted  to  in  the  name  of  science. 
Besides  the  sense  in  ivhich  the  term  science  is  used,  it 
is  also  necessary  to  investigate  the  conditions  for  settling 
the  scientific  character  of  a  discipline.  The  problem  is 
essentially  this  :  Shall  the  scientific  character  be  made 
a  postulate  to  which  a  subject  must  submit,  or  shall  the 
nature  of  the  material  determine  the  scientific  character 
of  the  treatment  ? 

Perhaps  the  great  variety  in  the  sociological  materials 
makes  science  applicable  to  some  in  one   sense   and  to 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A  SCIENCE?  273 

others  only  in  a  different  sense.  Here  we  may  use  math- 
ematics ;  there  natural  laiv ;  while  in  other  departments 
we  resort  to  psychology,  to  history,  to  hypotheses  and 
theories,  for  interpretation. 

We  want  to  make  scientific  in  the  strictest  sense  what- 
ever admits  of  it ;  we  tvant  to  discern  the  exact  nature 
of  the  material  considered,  in  order  to  learn  in  ivhat 
sense  it  can  he  made  scientific ;  and  we  want  to  evolve 
from  every  subject  the  science  which  it  involves. 

All  sociologists  are  agreed  that  no  sociological  system 
thus  far  developed  can  claim  to  be  thoroughly  scien- 
tific. Dr.  Ward  says  :  "  I  do  not  hesitate  to  pronounce 
as  mere  patchwork  the  greater  part  of  all  that  now  goes 
by  the  sounding  name  of  social  science."  ^  Numerous 
other  writers  liave  been  no  more  respectful  in  their 
utterances.  The  purport  of  the  question,  however,  is, 
whether  the  conditions  exist  for  ultimately  constructing 
the  science  of  society. 

It  seems  presumptuous  to  determine  before  the  inves- 
tigation what  shall  be  made  of  a  subject.  How  is  that 
possible  so  long  as  the  materials  have  not  been  mas- 
tered ?  In  our  aim  to  interpret  society  by  all  legitimate 
means  we  have  refused  to  let  the  question  of  the  possi- 
bility of  absolute  science  in  social  affairs  interfere  with 
our  investigations.  With  the  most  scientific  method 
possible  we  aim  at  the  science  of  society ;  how  far  the 
aim  is  realizable  the  result  must  show  ;  it  cannot  be 
determined  dogmatically  beforehand.  It  is  on  this  basis 
that  our  discussion  has  thus  far  proceeded,  in  order  not 
to  embarrass  the  beginner  with  problems  for  whose 
solution  he  has  not  the  data.     Society  as  a  fact  is  given 

1  Dynamic  Sociology,  i.,  700. 
18 


274     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

and  can  be  investigated  by  all ;  we  aim  to  discover  its 
essence,  its  evolution,  and  its  laws,  so  as  to  form  a  com- 
plete social  system,  without  prejudicing  the  ulterior 
results.  This  rational  procedure  leaves  the  mind  per- 
fectly free  in  its  researches,  requiring  only  knowledge 
in  the  best  possible  form.  This  process  has,  however, 
been  forestalled  by  another  method.  From  the  begin- 
ning Sociology  has  been  designated  and  treated  as  a 
positive  science.  This  decides  the  matter  if  tradition- 
alism is  to  be  the  arbiter.  The  very  history  of  Sociol- 
ogy obliges  us  to  consider  the  question  at  the  head  of 
the  chapter. 

We  have  seen  that  when  Comte  introduced  the  term 
"  Sociology  "  he  defined  it  as  the  science  of  society,  and 
aimed  to  make  it  a  physical  science.  The  mania  to 
reduce  all  knowledge  to  a  species  of  natural  science 
culminated  about  the  middle  of  this  century.  Of  the 
many  signal  failures  in  this  respect,  Comte's  "  Positive 
Philosophy "  is  a  striking  example.  He  agreed  with 
Kant  in  emphasizing  empirical  investigation  instead  of 
metaphysics  as  the  basis  of  knowledge  of  the  real  world. 
The  sensationalism  of  France  had  taught  him  the  same 
lesson.  But  he  failed  utterly  in  seizing  the  critical 
spirit  of  Kant  and  in  applying  the  critical  method  to 
liis  own  constructions.  The  results  he  attained  are  a 
significant  commentary  on  his  claims.  The  inchoate 
state  of  Sociology  might  have  suggested  reserve  respect- 
ing the  determination  of  the  positive  character  of  its 
material,  unless  the  question  was  to  be  settled  dog- 
matically. But  the  general  trend  favored  the  making 
of  all  knowledge  scientific.  As  a  consequence,  when 
it  was  found  that  all  knowledge  could  not  be  made 
scientific  in  the  sense  of  natural  science,  the  term 
"  science "  itself  was  so  stretched  as  to  apply  to  mate- 


rs  SOCIOLOGY  A  SCIENCE?  275 

rials  subject  to  various  degrees  of  definiteness  and 
certainty. 

When  science  includes  not  only  mathematics,  physics, 
and  biology,  but  also  anthropology,  history,  theology,  and 
various  kinds  of  speculation,  it  loses  its  specific  character. 
Science  in  that  case  is  not  limited  to  what  is  objective 
and  can  be  proved  as  such,  but  it  is  left  to  men  them- 
selves to  determine  the  use  of  the  term  and  to  make 
it  the  repository  of  their  subjective  notions  of  truth. 
Science  now  suffers  from  that  vagueness  with  which 
the  term  "  philosophy  "  has  long  been  afflicted.  There  is 
a  temptation  to  claim  that  investigations  are  scientific 
because  science  is  thought  to  be  absolute  ;  and  then  the 
loose  sense  in  which  science  is  used  enables  one  to  label 
"  scientific  "  all  kinds  of  real  and  supposed  knowledge. 
The  consequence  is  that  science  itself  is  thrust  from  its 
throne  of  exactness  and  finality.  Even  Mr.  Spencer 
embarrasses  us  when  he  expects  us  to  pass  through  his 
"  Synthetic  Philosophy  "  as  the  way  to  science.  He  uses 
science  in  the  popular  rather  than  the  technical  sense. 
He  speaks  of  "  inexact  "  science,  and  thus  finds  room 
for  much  "  scientific  "  material  which  others  might 
prefer  to  call  by  another  name. 

There  is  a  marked  difference  in  what  are  recognized 
as  sciences  in  a  technical  sense,  some  admitting  of  a 
much  greater  degree  of  definiteness  and  exactness  than 
others.  At  the  head  of  all  we  place  mathematics,  an 
a  jjriori  science,  all  its  constructions  depending  on  exact 
and  absolute  numbers  and  axioms.  Comte's  hierarchy 
of  the  sciences  can  be  studied  profitably  in  respect  to 
their  exactness.  Biology  cannot  be  as  definite  as  the 
sciences  which  deal  with  inorganic  matter.  The  definite- 
ness in  every  instance  depends  on  the  nature  of  the 
objects.     In  chemistry  the  objects  are  themselves  defi' 


276     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

iiite,  but  less  in  organic  than  in  inorganic.  The  in- 
organic objects  can  be  examined  by  many  investigators 
under  the  same  or  similar  conditions,  and  exact  results 
secured.  As  we  enter  life  and  investigate  psychological 
phenomena  and  social  intricacies,  we  deal  with  objects 
of  the  most  difficult  character  and  least  of  all  subject 
to  investigation  by  means  of  the  scientific  method. 
Numerous  illustrations  are  afforded  by  medical  practice 
when  it  treats  physical  ailments,  to  say  nothing  of  men- 
tal diseases.  The  body  can  be  dissected,  but  only  when 
dead ;  yet  it  is  life  we  want  to  understand.  Can  we  not 
also  speak  of  a  body  and  soul  of  society  ?  This  at  least 
is  clear,  that  science  becomes  difficult  in  proportion  as 
the  objects  are  complicated  and  variable. 

In  all  these  respects  Sociology  is  peculiarly  difficult. 
Society  is  composed  of  the  forces  of  individuals  ;  the 
individual  is  himself  exceedingly  complicated,  being  the 
highest  of  organisms.  Can  we  claim  to  have  a  science 
of  him  as  physiological,  psychical,  and  psycho-physical  ? 
We  are  not  dealing  with  an  abstract,  unreal  individual, 
but  with  the  concrete,  real  man,  who  teems  with  ele- 
ments wholly  beyond  the  province  of  strict  scientific 
analysis.  This  individual  in  his  natural  environment  is 
subject  to  perpetual  changes ;  were  the  scientific  data 
of  one  moment  possible,  the  changes  of  the  next,  chiefly 
internal  and  invisible,  might  be  wholly  beyond  our 
reach.  The  body  changes,  the  mind  changes,  the  en- 
vironment changes;  as  the  changes  themselves,  so  must 
their  results  be  unforeseen.  It  should  be  remembered 
that  we  cannot  experiment  with  the  individuals  as  with 
other  objects,  and  least  of  all  with  society. 

Take  now  two  individuals  of  neither  of  whom  we  have, 
strictly  speaking,  a  science ;  can  we  speak  of  a  science 
of  their  association  ?    If  the  action  of  one  can  be  fore- 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A  SCIENCE?  277 

told,  cau  its  effect  on  the  other  be  ?  Strict  scientific 
knowledge  is  evidently  out  of  the  question.  How  much 
less  possible  is  it  to  foretell  the  action  and  interaction 
and  reaction  of  the  social  forces  of  a  thousand  individ- 
uals, or  of  a  whole  nation,  or  of  humanity,  with  factors 
all  variable  and  amid  variable  surroundings  ;  and  can 
we  get  a  science  of  the  actions,  the  relations,  the  results  ? 
We  cannot  start  with  a  science  of  the  individual ;  much 
less  can  we  end  with  a  science  of  multitudes  of  indi- 
viduals or  of  their  social  energies. 

Natural  science  has  become  so  dominant  that  it  has 
determined  the  strict  sense  in  which  the  term  "  science  " 
is  to  be  used.  It  is  evident  that  in  point  of  accuracy, 
definiteness,  and  exactness.  Sociology  cannot  rank  with 
the  natural  sciences.  Nor  can  any  one  of  the  human 
disciplines  in  which  psychical  as  well  as  physical  ele- 
ments are  involved.  Sociology  deals  with  numbers  and 
with  physical  elements,  and  thus,  in  a  certain  sense,  a 
strict  science  is  possible  ;  but  this  does  not  imply  that 
the  entire  subject  will  yield  to  scientific  treatment.  So 
far  as  the  data  are  now  at  hand,  we  must  conclude  that 
in  the  strict  technical  sense  (in  the  sense  of  natural  or 
physical  science),  a  science  of  society  is  impossible. 
This  does  not  in  the  least  interfere  with  the  effort  to 
attain  the  utmost  scientific  accuracy,  but  it  prevents 
scientific  postulates  where  they  are  manifestly  out  of 
place.  Should  future  investigation  prove  a  strict  socio- 
logical science  possible,  every  honest  inquirer  will  hail 
the  result  with  joy. 

If  not  as  in  the  case  of  mathematics  and  chemistry, 
in  what  sense,  then,  can  we  speak  of  a  science  of  society  ? 
History  shows  that  the  term  "  science  "  is  used  with  a 
remarkable  degree  of  latitude.  Formerly  philosophy 
included  science,  frequently  the  terms  have  been  and  are 


278     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

used  synonymously,  so  that  a  "  philosophical "  magazine 
may  be  devoted  to  chemistry  or  other  natural  sciences.^ 
Writers  are  apt  to  mean  the  same  thing  whether  they 
speak  of  a  science  or  a  philosophy  of  law,  of  language, 
and  of  history.  Before  the  term  "  science  "  was  applied 
to  a  special  kind  of  objects  which  were  investigated  ac- 
cording to  a  particular  method,  it  was  used  to  designate 
deeper  knowledge,  especially  such  as  inquired  into  the 
causes  of  things,  or  knowledge  developed  in  a  systematic 
way.  Hence  it  came  to  mean  system,  and  some  specu- 
lative philosophers  have  claimed  that  metaphysic  is  the 
most  absolute  science.  We  speak  of  theology  and  his- 
tory as  sciences.  Yet  only  in  part  is  the  scientific 
method  applicable,  and  the  system  called  science  may  be 
one  of  faith  rather  than  of  scientific  data.  Thus  the 
source  and  character  of  what  was  termed  knowledge 
were  not  always  taken  into  account.     Less  than  a  cen- 

1  In  the  introduction  to  his  "  Logic  "  Ilegel  calls  attention  to  the  fact 
that  in  England  philosophy,  in  his  estimation  the  very  essence  and  climax 
of  exact  thinking,  was  not  yet  differentiated  from  natural  science.  He 
says  that  the  eminent  scientist  Newton  is  constantly  spoken  of  as  the 
greatest  philosopher.  Thermometers,  barometers,  and  similar  apparatus 
are  called  "  philosophical  instruments  ;  "  but  wood,  iron,  and  other 
materials  should  not  be  regarded  as  the  instruments  of  philosophy,  whose 
only  instrument  is  thought.  He  found  that  "  Annals  of  Philosophy  "  was 
"  a  magazine  of  chemistry,  mineralogy,  mechanics,  natural  history,  agri- 
culture, and  arts."  Most  astonishing,  however,  was  the  title  of  an  English 
book  :  "  The  Art  of  Preserving  the  Hair,  on  Philosophical  Principles, 
neatly  printed  in  post  8,  price  7  sh."  What  would  he  have  said  to  the 
philosophic  and  scientific  monstrosities  in  the  literature  of  our  day,  not  to 
mention  our  scientific  education,  our  scientific  politics,  our  scientific  gar- 
ments, our  scientific  cooking  utensils,  our  scientific  nostrums?  What 
would  he  have  said  if  ho  could  have  stepped  out  of  his  own  metaphysics 
into  the  crude  metaphysics  of  modern  Sociology,  crudely  dubbed  Science  ? 
He  might  have  said  :  "  I  have  demonstrated  tliat  being  ctjuals  non-being 
or  nothing.  These  scientists  illustrate  my  position.  They  prove  meta- 
physics nothing,  and  then  fill  their  books  with  metaphysics.  According 
to  their  own  showing,  they  al)Ouud  in  something  which  is  nothing." 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  279 

tury  ago  philosophical  speculation  was  deemed  pre-emi- 
nently scientific  in  Germany,  while  knowledge  based  on 
observation,  experience,  and  experiment,  was  rather  con- 
temptuously called  empiricism.  Now  the  reverse  is  the 
case.  A  priori  speculation  is  disparaged,  and  science  in 
the  technical  sense  means  objective  knowledge,  access- 
ible to  all  who  have  the  scientific  method,  and  verifiable 
by  means  of  this  method.  When  used  technically,  a 
sharp  distinction  is  made  between  philosophy  and  science, 
the  former  dealing  with  abstractions,  principles,  and  the 
ultimate  problems  of  the  human  mind,  while  the  latter 
adheres  more  closely  to  reality,  using  observation  and 
experiment  as  its  means,  and  aiming  to  discover  the 
causes  and  laws  of  phenomena,  and  to  construct  a  system 
of  them.  For  their  best  work  scientists,  however,  re- 
quire the  highest  philosophical  powers  ;  but  we  must 
discriminate  between  their  science  and  their  philosophy. 
Monism,  materialism,  spiritualism,  pantheism,  are  not 
science,  but  philosophy,  speculation  which  no  experiment 
or  demonstration  can  verify.  When  men  start  with 
materialism,  which  is  a  mere  hypothesis,  they  make  it  a 
law  for  the  reduction  of  all  phenomena  to  its  material- 
istic monism,  test  all  knowledge  by  it,  and  reject  as 
unworthy  of  inquiry  what  cannot  be  subjected  to  physical 
force.  They  may  call  this  science,  but  it  is  speculation 
without  scientific  warrant. 

While  not  subject  to  the  same  exactness  as  the  natural 
sciences,  we  are  justified  in  speaking  of  Sociology  as  a 
science  in  the  sense  of  systematized  Knoivledge.  We 
say  knowledge,  not  opinion  or  faith ;  and  if  this  knowl- 
edge cannot  be  made  as  strictly  scientific  as  mathe- 
matics, that  no  more  interferes  with  its  trustworthiness 
and  value  than  the  genuineness  and  preciousness  of 
music  are  destroyed  for  the  man  who  sees  no  science  in  it. 


280     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  unscientific  data  usually  increase  in  proportion  as  a 
subject  is  exalted  and  appeals  to  the  highest  human 
interests.  We  thus  put  Sociology  in  the  same  category 
as  the  other  human  disciplines  called  sciences,  such  as 
psychology,  economics,  jurisprudence,  ethics,  politics,  all 
of  which  admit  of  principles,  laws,  and  system ;  but  it  is 
immeasurably  more  complicated  and  difficult  than  these, 
involves  all  of  them  and  much  more,  and  for  scientific 
treatment  in  any  sense  presents  the  greatest  perplexities. 

With  an  evidently  realizable  sense  of  science  before  us, 
we  can  pursue  the  study  of  Sociology  with  the  determi- 
nation to  make  our  investigations  as  scientific  as  possible, 
and  to  put  the  knowledge  gained  in  the  best  form.  We 
shall  be  thankful  if  this  knowledge  can  be  made  strictly 
positive,  but  prefer  not  to  call  it  positive  and  capable  of 
prevision  before  it  has  been  proved  such.  So  much  at 
least  has  the  era  of  criticism  and  of  scientific  progress 
taught  us,  —  that  we  must  learn  what  the  mind  can  do 
with  a  subject  before  we  settle  dogmatically  what  it 
must  do  with  it.  In  other  words,  in  order  to  make  the 
most  of  Sociology,  we  must  expel  that  arrogant  a 
priori  dogmatism  which  obstructs  real  knowledge  by  put- 
ting in  its  place  empty  speculation  and  undemonstrable 
hypothesis. 

Our  aim  is  thus  unmistakable.  We  go  to  the  mind 
to  study  its  character,  before  we  class  psychology  with 
the  natural  sciences  or  with  philosophy ;  we  go  to  history 
for  our  knowledge  of  human  events,  without  settling 
beforehand  that  in  history  we  must  find  only  the  work- 
ing of  physical  forces,  and  that  definite  and  final  laws 
of  progress  must  be  the  result ;  we  study  human  ethics, 
before  resolving  to  find  only  an  evolution  of  the  ethics 
of  brutes  ;  we  try  to  master  political  economy,  without 
determining   that  the   struggle   for   existence   and   the 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  281 

survival  of  the  fittest  furnish  the  sole  law  for  human 
industries  :  and  just  so  we  go  to  society  for  our  knowl- 
edge of  society,  banishing  all  unscientific  bias  in  favor 
of  science,  in  order  to  be  perfectly  free  in  using  to  best 
advantage  all  means  to  make  our  interpretation  definite, 
exact,  comprehensive,  and  final.  It  is  admitted  that  the 
man  who  starts  with  the  purpose  of  writing  history  to 
prove  materialism  or  spiritualism,  or  to  establish  some 
political  dogma  or  ethical  theory,  is  liable  to  vitiate  the 
whole  process  of  his  inquiry,  none  the  less  really  though 
it  be  done  unconsciously ;  but  the  genuine  historian  is 
intent  solely  on  the  truth,  takes  it  where  and  as  he  finds 
it,  and  lets  it  be  its  own  invincible  advocate.  Does  the 
sociologist  become  unscientific  when  he  pursues  the 
same  course  ? 

Sociology,  according  to  its  etymology,  is  the  reason  of 
society,  the  intellectual  interpretation  and  logical  system 
of  human  association.  This  sociological  system  is  yet 
an  ideal,  but  we  keep  it  in  view  while  dealing  with  the 
confused  actuality  of  Sociology.  For  the  realization  of 
this  system  much  preparatory  study  and  long  processes 
of  development  will  yet  be  required ;  but  if  we  must 
adopt  Comte's  Positive  Philosophy,  or  Spencer's  Syn- 
thetic Philosophy,  as  the  way  to  Sociology,  we  are  afraid 
of  being  lost  on  the  way  and  of  taking  theories  for  facts. 
Is  it  not  significant  that  philosophy  is  by  these  writers 
made  the  road  to  science  ?  Why  not  resort  to  the 
scientific  method  of  induction,  construct  a  science  so  far 
as  possible,  and  make  that  the  basis  of  the  philosophy  ? 
The  exploded  speculation  of  the  metaphysical  era  drew 
its  science  from  its  philosophy  ;  modern  thought  prefers 
to  start  with  science  and  build  on  it,  as  a  basis,  the 
philosophy  of  the  universe. 

With  the  term  "  science  "  so  carefully  guarded  as  above, 


282     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

we  do  not  hesitate  to  employ  it  for  the  system  of  society. 
Sociology  as  the  philosophy  of  society  may  be  less 
liable  to  misunderstanding  ;  but  we  must  insist  on  mak- 
ing the  study  of  the  social  realism  and  the  scientific 
data  within  reach  the  foundation  of  our  philosophy.  All 
disciplines,  so  far  as  involved  in  society,  are  to  be  used 
in  our  research,  whether  they  be  natural  or  humanistic. 
Some  laws  we  may  term  natural,  others  psychical,  some 
personal  as  involving  the  entire  psycho-physical  person- 
ality, others  sociological.  If  we  can  find  laws  expressive 
of  the  forces  at  work,  we  shall  accept  them  ;  if  they  are 
merely  empirical,  we  shall  designate  them  as  such  ;  if  a 
law  stands  only  for  a  series  of  events  or  for  a  rule,  and 
indicates  what  is  customary  rather  than  universal  and 
necessary,  in  every  case  just  what  is  found  should  be 
given,  remembering  that  our  idea  of  society  is  true  in 
proportion  as  it  is  the  intellectual  counterpart  of  society 
as  an  actuality.  We  cannot  foretell  just  what  the  results 
will  be,  but  we  are  justified  in  believing  that  they  will  be 
of  the  utmost  value. 

There  are  various  methods  for  determining  the  scientific  charac- 
ter of  Sociology.  The  traditional  method  follows  Comte  in  regard- 
ing all  knowledge  as  positive  and  scientific.  When  this  theory  is 
adopted  as  final,  it  is  a  dogmatism  which  dispenses  with  tlie  pain- 
ful necessity  of  inquiring  into  the  exact  sense  in  which  "science" 
is  to  be  used.  By  ignoring  the  fact  that  natural  science  has  deter- 
mined the  technical  sense  of  "scientific,"  the  term  "science"  can 
be  used  loosely  and  variably.  A  scientific  "  habit  "  can  be  put  for 
scientific  thinking.  With  tliis  loose  use  of  the  term  all  the  a  priori 
possibilities  of  the  use  of  "  science  "  have  not  yet  been  exhausted. 
Hypotheses  respecting  primitive  peoples,  ideas,  and  things  of 
which  we  have  no  scientific  data ;  beliefs  with  reference  to  the 
origin  and  evolution  of  social  forms  and  institutions,  of  which  no 
knowledge  is  within  reacli ;  and  preconceived  notions  about  secret 
processes  in  evolution,  —  all  can  be  designated  as  scientific.     Meta> 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  283 

physic  can  be  ridiculed  as  utterly  unscientific,  and  then,  in  the 
name  of  monism  or  physicism  or  transmutationism  or  some  other 
ism,  can  be  lugged  in  and  given  the  scientific  stamp. 

The  scientific  character  of  Sociology  can  also  be  assumed  by 
making  natural  science  the  model  to  which  it  must,  nolens  volens, 
be  conformed.  This  test  has  been  applied  to  history,  psychology, 
ethics,  politics,  philosophy,  and  social  affairs  generally.  Its  empha- 
sis on  facts  as  the  tangible  reality  gave  a  marked  impulse  to  his- 
torical investigation;  but  it  was  soon  discovered  that  facts  in 
humanity  and  facts  in  nature  are  very  different,  and  that  the  laws 
of  investigation  in  one  sphere  may  help  those  in  another,  but  can- 
not be  authoritative  and  final.  But  in  order  to  make  humanity 
subject  to  natural  law,  why  not  reduce  it  to  mechanical  and  physi- 
cal necessity  ?  Hence  the  materialistic  dogmatism  respecting  man 
and  society.  Emphasis  was  placed  on  what  was  thought  explicable 
in  terms  of  natural  science ;  what  could  not  even  be  thought  explica- 
ble now  was  postulated  as  undoubtedly  explicable  in  this  way  at 
some  future  time.  The  materialistic  hypothesis  is  considered  more 
fully  later.  We  have  reason  to  believe  that  this  species  of  postu- 
lated naturalism  has  had  its  day,  except  in  the  case  of  metaphysi- 
cal survivals. 

An  entirely  different  method  is  the  truly  scientific  one.  Rejecting 
all  a  priori  constructions  falsely  called  science,  it  goes  to  the  subject- 
matter  of  Sociology,  and  from  the  natui'e  of  the  material  learns 
what  methods,  what  laws,  what  system  are  possible.  Thus  we 
evolve  from  society  the  science  it  involves,  instead  of  forcing  on 
society  a  science  from  a  foreign  department  or  from  our  preconceived 
notion  of  science.  No  argument  is  needed  to  commend  to  the 
scientific  thinker  this  scientific  method  of  determining  the  scientific 
character  of  Sociology. 

We  can  understand  how,  when  the  progress  in  natural  science 
threatened  to  make  nature  the  sole  object  of  valid  knowledge,  all 
subjects  were  to  be  made  scientific  in  the  sense  of  the  physical 
sciences.  The  results  of  this  attempt  have  been  commented  on  by 
scientists  themselves.  The  most  emphatic  protests  against  the 
effort  to  reduce  all  knowledge  to  natural  science,  and  to  make  this 
science  the  test  of  the  value  of  all  thinking,  came  from  the  ranks  of 
science.  See,  for  instance,  Du  Bois-Reymond's  addresses :  "  tjber 
die  Grenzen  der  Naturerkenntniss"  and  "Z)te  sieben  Weltrdlhscl." 
The  works  of  Lotze  and  Wundt  also  show  that  science  in  its  techni- 


284     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

cal  sense  is  severely  limited.  The  testimony  of  these  two  thinkers 
is  the  more  significant  because  they  passed  through  physiology  and 
medical  science  to  philosophy,  and  rank  both  as  scientists  and  phi- 
losophers. The  most  eminent  scientists,  like  Helmholtz,  have  been 
far  more  modest  in  their  claims  than  those  of  the  second  or  third 
rank,  who  expected  to  catch  in  their  scientific  net  all  that  was  worth 
knowing,  and  were  able,  with  a  single  postulate  called  scientific,  to 
evolve  the  universe. 

Too  much  rigor  cannot  be  exercised  in  the  method  and  criticism 
of  knowledge,  but  the  mere  form  of  knowledge  does  not  determine 
its  substantial  value.  We  refuse  to  depreciate  the  vast  realm  of 
the  personality  because  we  cannot  make  it  as  strictly  scientific  as 
physics.  The  term  "science"  has  been  suSicieutly  abused  by  mak- 
ing it  give  absoluteness  and  finality  to  mere  vagaries  which  were 
dubbed  scientific,  and  every  thinker  in  Sociology  will  strive  to  keep 
these  abuses  from  his  specialty.  Shall  we  ignore  history  and 
literature  and  politics  and  ethics  and  religion  because  we  cannot 
reduce  them  to  natural  science  V  Is  a  fact  less  a  fact  because  its 
scientific  place  has  not  been  determined  ? 

Many  a  mistake  consists  chiefly  in  putting  the  ideal  of  science 
for  the  attained  actuality.  There  is  as  yet  but  little  science,  though 
every  subject  is  striving  to  become  scientific.  Even  in  the  sense  of 
a  logical  system,  Sociology  is  scientific  only  tentatively.  We  may 
believe  that  a  science  lies  at  the  basis  of  all  we  call  intellectual 
and  spiritual ;  but  whether  we  shall  ever  be  able  to  discover  this 
science  is  a  different  matter.  Now  to  apply  the  scientific  test  of 
mathematics  or  physics  to  objects  which  do  not  yet  admit  of  such 
a  test  is  simply  a  piece  of  arrogance. 

We  of  course  recognize  social  phenomena  as  connected,  not 
arbitrary,  not  creations  out  of  nothing,  but  as  caused  and  causa- 
tive. There  must  be  some  kind  of  regularity  in  human  society, 
some  kind  of  law;  otherwise  society  could  not  be  an  object  of 
rational  thought  or  of  a  logical  system.  Chance  and  accident  are 
purely  subjective ;  they  mean  that  we  do  not  apprehend  the  causes 
actually  at  work.  But  how  far  we  can  discover  the  causes  and 
laws  must  be  left  to  future  development.  So  exclusively  has 
Sociology  been  treated  as  historic  that  some  sociologists  have 
made  the  regularity  found  in  human  history  the  essence,  just  as  if 
the  sole  aim  of  the  study  were  to  find  sociological  laws  in  human 
progress  and  to  make  social  prevision  possible.     That  there  are 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A  SCIENCE?  285 

laws  of  human  association  aside  from  the  historic  progress  of 
humanity  has  been  overlooked.  Even  if  the  laws  of  history  are 
beyond  our  reach,  we  can  have  a  Sociology,  namely,  a  science  or 
system  of  human  association,  giving  the  principles  on  which  all 
society  rests.  If  Sociology  in  this  sense  is  not  possible,  how 
can  social  statics  be  a  department  of  Sociology?  Sociology  as 
the  science  of  human  development  reduces  the  whole  to  social 
dynamics. 

Although  an  exact,  mathematical  determination  of  human 
events  is  out  of  the  question,  this  does  not  imply  that  human 
affairs  are  involved  in  impenetrable  mystery.  In  social  reform 
and  in  our  outlook  into  the  future  we  can  never  treat  persons  as 
inorganic  or  material  factors  and  mechanical  forces.  Our  limita- 
tions leave  beyond  our  knowledge  and  control  many  powers  and 
their  operations.  Nevertheless,  certain  conditions  are  within  our 
reach.  We  cannot  foretell  what  progress  will  occur,  or  when  and 
how ;  there  may  even  be  retrogressions  or  spiral  movements  which 
we  cannot  foresee.  The  past,  however,  inspires  the  confidence 
that  there  will  be  evolution,  and  that  this  will  promote  the  progress 
of  humanity.  Certain  powers  inherent  in  human  nature  and  in 
the  external  world  must  continue  their  work ;  the  discovery  of  these 
is  our  especial  aim,  since  they  give  us,  whatever  unknown  forms 
they  may  take,  the  permanent  factors  in  history.  But  aside  from 
these  there  are  other  objects  which  we  understand,  and  they  are  of 
great  importance  in  Sociology.  Education,  ethics,  religion,  the 
state,  language,  literature,  laws,  institutions,  we  can  interpret,  their 
influence  we  know,  their  character  we  can  affect.  These  have  a 
kind  of  independent  existence  as  social  products,  abiding  while 
individuals  and  whole  generations  pass  away.  However  variable 
and  transitory  personalities  may  be,  here  we  have  a  large  class  of 
objects  respecting  which  thorough  knowledge  is  within  reach.  So 
far  as  these  permanent  factors  are  known  we  can  form  an  estimate 
of  their  reformatory  character  and  of  their  influence  in  shaping  the 
future  course  of  society.  It  need  hardly  be  stated  that  for  this  no 
claim  to  scientific  knowledge  can  be  made. 

Sociology  is  largely  a  philosophy  of  these  social  products. 
They  are  the  treasures  of  culture,  and  their  existence  is  the  chief 
measure  of  culture.  It  is  from  these  treasures  that  the  individual 
draws  his  wealth.  Culture  consists  in  using,  developing,  and  con- 
serving such  treasures.     We  can  understand  why  the  conditions 


286     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

for  civilizatiou  are  most  favorable  in  zones  where  men  are  obliged 
to  exert  themselves  to  secure  a  livelihood  and  yet  find  time  for 
other  exertions  than  the  struggle  for  existence.  What  is  wrought 
out,  accunmlated,  and  handed  down  by  a  people  becomes  a  perma- 
nent element  of  culture.  Perhaps  in  a  lower  stage  of  civilization 
people  were  stronger  than  now ;  but  the  treasures  of  culture  were 
inferior.  Our  hope  of  human  progress  is  based  chiefly  on  those 
permanent  social  products  which  shall  prove  a  blessing  to  coming 
generations.  The  study  of  society  is  thus  largely  a  study  of  social 
institutions  and  inheritances. 

That  the  study  of  these  according  to  their  nature  is  different 
from  the  study  of  material  objects  is  evident.  As  in  the  latter  we 
adopt  the  method  of  natural  science,  so  in  the  former  we  adopt  the 
sociological  method.  When  writers  like  Gumplowicz  insist  that 
Sociology  must  be  scientific  in  a  naturalistic  sense,  they  ignore  the 
difference  in  the  subject-matter  of  society  and  of  nature.  Such  an 
insistence  is  an  assumption  which  is  neither  scientific  nor  rational, 
and  does  not  in  the  least  enhance  the  scientific  character  or  value  of 
Sociology. 

In  a  previous  chapter  we  have  attempted  to  limit  sociological 
inquiries  strictly  to  the  sphere  of  Sociology.  How  difficult  it  is  to 
do  this  becomes  especially  evident  when  the  attempts  to  make  of 
Sociology  a  science  in  the  technical  sense  are  considered.  In  order 
to  accomplish  that,  there  has  been  a  marked  tendency  to  reduce 
sociological  to  physical  laws,  which  has  given  a  strong  flavor  of 
materialism  to  the  subject.  This  fact,  not  the  investigation  of  the 
ultimate  problems,  is  the  reason  for  referring  to  the  discussion  of 
materialism  here. 

What  matter  is  in  itself  we  do  not  know ;  only  its  manifestations 
are  within  reach  of  our  faculties.  The  same  is  true  of  mind. 
This  careful  investigators  recognize,  and  for  that  reason  they  do 
not  now  as  confidently  as  some  decades  since  transmute  matter 
into  mind.  Under  the  head  of  psycho-physics  a  new  department 
of  inquiry  has  been  originated;  but  psycliology  has  not  been 
reduced  to  physiology.  Even  if  investigators  believe  that  natural 
force  will  eventually  be  able  to  explain  consciousness,  reason,  and 
ethics,  they  have  no  right  to  promulgate  their  faith  as  a  scientific 
axiom.  Wherever  Kant's  philoso]>liy  has  penetrated,  confidence 
in  solving  the  ultimate  problems  of  l)eing  is  shaken;  where 
noumena  are  believed  to  be  beyond  our  reach,  phenomena  absorb  the 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A  SCIENCE?  287 

attention.  Especially  was  this  natural  for  English  philosophers 
under  the  iniiuence  of  Locke's  empiricisui  and  Hume's  scepticism. 
"We  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  to  find  Mr.  Spencer  very  modest 
in  his  claims  respecting  the  ultimate  problems.  In  his  "First 
Principles"  (51)  he  pronounces  Matter,  in  its  iiltimate  nature, 
"  absolutely  incomprehensible ; "  Force  passes  all  understanding 
(GG) ;  Motion  is  likewise  a  mystery  (5G-7).  In  other  words,  matter, 
force,  motion  belong  to  the  unknowable.  The  charge  of  materi- 
alism does  not  apply  to  him ;  for,  since  the  ultimate  questions  are 
unanswerable,  there  is  just  as  much  ground  for  spiritualism  as  for 
materialism  (502-3). ^  Yet  he  attempts  "the  interpretation  of  all 
phenomena  in  terms  of  matter,  motion,  and  force,"  which  are  pro- 
nounced inscrutable  and  nothing  but  symbols.  It  is  not  apparent 
what  is  to  be  gained  by  a  resort  to  the  mysterious  and  unknowable 
for  the  interpretation  of  phenomena  which  lie  open  before  us.  If 
Mr.  Spencer's  symbols  are  themselves  uninterpretable,  of  what 
use  can  they  be  for  the  interpretation  of  society  ?  We  have  not 
yet  learned  the  art  of  extracting  intelligence  from  ignorance,  the 
knowable  from  the  unknowable.  But  the  very  fact  that  symbols 
to  interpret  social  phenomena  are  drawn  from  the  natural  and 
physical  realm  tends  to  give  a  materialistic  stamp  to  Sociology. 
However  guarded  Mr.  Spencer  may  be  in  explaining  the  use  of  his 
terms,  others  may  be  tempted  to  employ  matter,  force,  and  motion 
for  the  promotion  of  materialism. 

There  are  evidences  that  we  are  passing  out  of  the  era  when 
scientific  phraseology  and  philosophical  theories  were  taken  for 
science,  into  a  more  critical  era  which  seeks  to  conserve  science 
itself  while  consuming  the  dross  attached  to  it.     The  mind  is 

1  The  passage  is  as  follows:  "  The  interpretation  of  all  phenomena  in  terms  of 
Matter,  Motion,  and  Force  is  nothing  more  than  the  reduction  of  our  complex 
symbols  of  thought  to  the  simplest  symbols;  and  when  the  equation  has  been 
brought  to  its  lowest  terms  the  symbols  remain  symbols  still.  Hence  the  reason- 
ings contained  in  the  foregoing  pages  afford  no  support  to  either  of  the  antago- 
nist hypotheses  respecting  the  ultimate  nature  of  things.  Their  implications 
are  no  more  materialistic  than  they  are  spiritualistic;  and  no  more  spiritualistic 
than  they  are  materialistic.  .  .  .  He  who  rightly  interprets  the  doctrine  contained 
in  this  work  will  see  that  neither  of  these  terms  can  be  taken  as  ultimate.  He 
will  see  that  though  the  relation  of  subject  and  object  renders  necessary  to  us 
these  antithetical  conceptions  of  Spirit  and  Matter,  the  one  is  no  less  than  the 
other  to  be  regarded  as  but  a  sign  of  the  Unknown  Realitj'  which  underlies 
both." 


288     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

coming  to  itself  and   asserting  its  claims ;    that  is,  it  recognizes 
matter,  and  itself  as  different  from  matter. 

A  superficial  view  is  inclined  to  regard  material  phenomena  as 
more  clear  than  the  mental,  and  to  make  the  former  the  means 
of  interpreting  the  latter.  A  deeper  view,  however,  reverses  this. 
The  entire  external  world  is  known  to  us  only  as  a  reflection 
of  our  own  minds,  only  as  it  becomes  a  subjective  element.  We 
know  the  material  only  in  terms  of  our  intellects,  and  never  can 
get  out  of  our  minds  into  things  as  the  interpreters  of  our  mental 
processes.  Since  we  never  can  deal  with  anything  but  mental 
percepts  and  concepts  of  objects,  it  seems  strange,  as  Lotze  re- 
mai'ks,  that  mind,  which  alone  can  discern  or  interpret  matter, 
should  ever  be  lost  in  matter.  Some  terms  become  so  familiar 
by  frequent  use  that  we  take  it  for  granted  we  have  their  meaning, 
when  they  are  the  very  ones  that  most  of  all  need  explanation. 
If  men  would  think  through  the  terms  they  use,  they  would  be  less 
inclined  to  resort  to  natural  law,  material  force,  and  mechanical 
processes,  all  frequently  used  without  any  definite  sense,  for  an 
interpretation  of  the  universe,  particularly  of  social  phenomena. 

Men  who  proclaim  their  total  ignorance  of  matter  need  only 
become  fully  conscious  of  what  they  do  in  order  to  make  them 
hesitate  to  absorb  mind  in  matter  and  reduce  the  social  to 
material  phenomena.  Carpenter  says  in  his  "  Mental  Physiology," 
"  There  seems  valid  ground  for  the  assertion  that  our  notion  of 
Matter  is  a  conception  of  intellect.  Force  being  that  externality  of 
which  we  have  the  most  direct  —  perhaps  even  the  onZ^^  direct  — 
cognizance."  To  us,  mind  is  always  first;  through  it  alone,  and 
only  in  mental  terms,  can  we  know  matter. 

Brande  says:  "Of  the  ultimate  nature  of  matter  the  human 
faculties  cannot  take  cognizance;  nor  can  data  be  furnished  by 
observation  or  experiment  on  which  to  found  an  investigation  of 
it.     All  we  know  of  it  is  its  sensible  properties." 

Lord  Rayleigh,  professor  of  experimental  physics,  Cambridge, 
England,  said  in  his  presidential  address  to  the  British  Science 
Association  :  "  Many  excellent  people  are  afraid  of  science  as  tend- 
ing towards  materialism.  That  such  apprehension  should  exist 
is  not  surprising,  for  unfortunately  there  are  writers,  speaking  in 
the  name  of  science,  who  have  set  themselves  to  foster  it.  It  is 
true  that  among  scientific  men,  as  in  other  classes,  crude  views  are 
to  V)e  met  with  as  to  the  deeper  things  of  Nature  ;  but  that  the 


rs  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  289 

life-long  beliefs  of  Newton,  of  Faraday,  and  of  Maxwell  are  incon- 
sistent with  the  scientific  habit  of  mind,  is  surely  a  proposition 
which  I  need  not  pause  to  refute." 

Huxley :  "  Matter  and  force,  so  far  as  we  know,  are  mere 
names  for  certain  forms  of  consciousness."  He  also  says  :  "  When 
Materialists  stray  beyond  the  borders  of  their  path  and  begin  to 
talk  of  there  being  nothing  but  matter  and  force  and  necessary 
laws,  I  decline  to  follow  them." 

Numerous  equally  significant  utterances  of  other  scientists  we 
are  obliged  to  omit.  We  cannot,  however,  refrain  fi'om  quoting 
a  recent  statement  of  a  scientific,  economic,  and  social  thinker 
of  the  highest  rank.  Professor  Schmoller,  now  Rector  of  the 
University  of  Berlin.  In  vol.  vi.,  "  Handwdrterbuch  der  Staats- 
wissenschaften "  (  549)  he  says :  "  Whatever  one  may  think  in 
our  day  about  the  connection  of  physical  and  psychical  life  ;  no 
matter  how  one  may  emphasize  that  our  intellectual  life  is  con- 
ditioned by  our  nervous  system  ;  liowever  one  may  properly  con- 
ceive our  feelings  as  attached  to  physiological  processes  ;  so  much 
is  certain,  that  we  cannot  explain  the  coexistence  and  sequence 
of  intellectual  conditions  by  means  of  nervous  conditions,  that  the 
last  recognizable  condition  of  material  elements  and  the  first 
actions  (or  responses,  Accorde)  of  the  soul's  life  now,  and  probably 
for  all  time  to  come,  must  stand  opposite  each  other  as  inde- 
pendent phenomena.  Therefore  those  attempts  at  explanation 
which  claim  to  deduce  the  conduct  of  man  from  mere  physical 
or  biological  elements  must  all  he  pi'onounced  failures  or  insuffi- 
cient. .  .  .  Whatever  action  there  may  be  of  natural  and  intellec- 
tual causes  on  each  other,  it  must  be  maintained  that  we  deal  with 
two  independent  systems  of  causes,  each  following  its  own  laws, 
and  each  requiring,  and  capable  of,  independent  investigation  of 
the  connections  they  sustain." 

It  is  significant  that  the  scientist  Ernst  Haeckel  felt  it  necessary 
to  oppose  that  shallow  sensationalism  which  disparages  reason, 
and  to  defend  emphatically  and  repeatedly  the  union  of  philosophy 
and  science,  of  reflection  and  empiricism,  of  the  idea  and  experi- 
ence. His  influence  in  favor  of  that  species  of  monism  which  has 
become  so  powerful  in  Sociology  is  great,  and  for  that  reason  we 
here  refer  to  him.  He  identifies  the  monistic  and  mechanical 
philosophy.  "  The  mechanical  or  monistic  philosophy  asserts 
that  everywhere  the  phenomena  of  human  life,  as  well  as  those 

19 


290     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

of  external  nature,  ai'e  under  the  control  of  fixed  and  unalterable 
laws,  that  there  is  everywhere  a  necessary  causal  connection 
between  phenomena,  and  that,  accordingly,  the  whole  knowable 
universe  forms  one  undivided  whole,  a  monon."  There  are  no 
purposive,  teleological  causes.  What  is  called  free-will  is  declared 
to  be  as  much  subject  to  fixed  laws  "  as  any  other  natural 
phenomenon."  He  rejects  the  popular  distinction  between  nature 
and  spirit.  "Man  is  not  above  nature,  but  in  nature."  ("The 
Evolution  of  Man,"  English  translation,  vol.  ii.,  455).  This 
monism,  he  claims,  might  be  called  spiritualism  as  well  as  materi- 
alism ;  but  as  it  is  mechanical  monism,  it  has  a  materialistic  rather 
than  spiritualistic  quality. 

Not  a  few  scientists  have  been  astonished  at  the  facility  with 
which  Haeckel  evolved  man  from  the  monera  and  amoebae,  and 
philosophers  must  be  equally  astonished  at  his  monism.  He 
declares  that  the  monistic  philosophy  "can  as  little  believe  in 
force  without  matter,  as  in  matter  without  force.  .  .  .  The  '  spirit  ' 
and  '  mind  '  of  men  are  but  forces  which  are  inseparably  con- 
nected with  the  material  substance  of  our  bodies.  Just  as  the 
motive  force  of  our  flesh  is  involved  in  the  muscular  form-element, 
so  is  the  thinking  force  of  our  spirit  involved  in  the  form-element 
of  the  brain.  Our  spiritual  forces  are  as  much  functions  of  this 
part  of  the  body  as  every  force  is  a  function  of  a  material  body. 
We  know  of  no  matter  which  does  not  possess  force,  and, 
conversely,  of  no  forces  that  are  not  connected  with  matter " 
(456-7). 

And  this  dualism  of  matter  and  force  we  are  seriously  asked  to 
take  as  'Zionism !  The  one  cannot  be  resolved  into  the  other,  the 
one  does  not  precede  the  other,  but  both  are  inseparable.  This 
inseparableness  is,  consequently,  the  monistic  element.  For  the 
sake  of  intellectual  honesty  let  us  call  this  system  dualistic  monism 
or  monistic  dualism. 

He  is  consistent  with  his  theory  that  antbrojiology  is  a  part  of 
zoology.  He  claims  that  lie  sees  that  "  in  tlie  entire  history  of 
the  evolution  of  man,  in  the  history  of  the  germ,  as  well  as  in  that 
of  the  tribe,  no  other  active  forces  have  been  at  work  than  in  the 
rest  of  organic  and  inorganic  forces."  Man  under  "  the  fixed  and 
unalterable  laws "  of  nature,  entirely  controlled  by  mechanical 
causes,  absolutely  without  free-will,  cannot,  therefore,  be  any 
more  responsible  for  his  actions  than  the  brute. 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  291 

Now  turn  to  the  preface  of  this  book.  Of  its  subject  he  says  : 
"  No  other  branch  has  been  so  wilfully  obscured  and  mystified, 
by  priestly  influence."  The  conclusions  reached  by  the  study 
produce  "  an  incredulous  smile  "  and  even  "  disgust."  But  are 
not  the  priestly  influence,  the  smile,  and  the  disgust  the  inevitable 
product  of  the  unalterable  mechanical  laws  ?  He  denounces  scien- 
tists who  dissent  from  his  conclusions,  as  severely  as  he  does  "  the 
infallible  Vatican  "  and  "  the  black  international ;  "  yet,  according 
to  his  own  theory,  those  scientists,  and  that  Vatican,  and  all  the 
gods  of  Olympus,  and  all  the  ghosts  that  haunt  men,  are  nothing 
but  the  product  of  those  fixed  and  unalterable  laws !  His  wrath 
is  kindled  against  men  and  gods,  the  very  product  of  his  monism. 
If  an  absolute  mechanical  law  does  away  with  all  freedom,  why 
blame  the  product  of  absolute  necessity?  The  Greeks  already 
knew  that  it  is  folly  to  fight  against  Fate.  But  as  an  apology  for 
his  wrath,  we  must  remember  that  it  too  is  the  product  of  fixed 
and  unalterable  mechanical  laws,  just  as  the  mischievous  views 
he  so  heroically  combats,  if  the  mechanical  laws  admit  of  heroism. 
We  have  no  language  to  express  our  convictions  respecting  a 
monism  that  produces  all  in  the  universe  according  to  an  absolute 
and  blind  necessity,  and  then  turns  on  men  and  gods,  on  supersti- 
tion and  wickedness,  which  are  solely  and  helplessly  its  own 
product,  and  berates  them  as  if  they  were  not  its  legitimate  off- 
spring, as  if  they  could  help  what  the  mechanical  laws  made 
them.  A  system  that  ends  in  absurdity  needs  no  further  criti- 
cism. When,  however,  it  is  to  be  made  the  law  of  Sociology,  we 
have  a  right  to  protest.  Here  a  healthy  agnosticism  is  more 
rational.  This  scientific  agnosticism  may  have  room  for  faith 
where  science  and  philosophy  cannot  rule.  Haeckel  himself  gives  a 
striking  passage  respecting  the  limits  of  scientific  inquiry:  "The 
history  of  the  evolution  of  organism,  equally  with  the  history  of 
human  civilization,  can  never  be  the  subject  of  '  exact '  investi- 
gation." 

Sociology  has  too  long  suffered  from  philosophical  speculations 
and  metaphysical  hypotheses,  which  were  confidently  proclaimed 
scientific.  Schafiie  ("Bau  und  Leben  des  socialen  Kdrpers,"  i., 
128)  thinks  that  the  work  now  most  of  all  required  is  of  a  pre- 
paratory character.  "  The  work  of  description  is  far  from  being 
completed."  To  him  it  seems  doubtful  whether  we  are  prepared 
to  establish  any  social  laws.     "  At  the  present  stage  of  the  investi- 


292     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

gation  we  do  not  presume  to  decide  whether  social  laws  of  general 
application  will  be  the  result  of  the  comparative  description." 

To  the  student  can  be  commended  the  reserve  found  (vol.  i.,  3) 
in  Tylor's  "  Primitive  Culture  :  "  "  None  will  deny  that,  as  each 
man  knows  by  the  evidence  of  his  own  consciousness,  definite  and 
natural  cause  does,  to  a  great  extent,  determine  human  action. 
Then,  keeping  aside  fi'om  considerations  of  extra-natural  interfer- 
ence and  causeless  spontaneity,  let  us  take  this  admitted  existence 
of  natural  cause  and  effect  as  our  standing-ground,  and  travel  on  it 
as  far  as  it  will  bear  us.  It  is  on  this  same  basis  that  physical 
nature  pursues,  with  ever-increasing  success,  its  quest  of  laws 
of  nature.  Nor  need  this  restriction  hamper  the  scientific  study  of 
human  life,  in  which  the  real  difficulties  are  the  practical  ones  of 
enormous  complexity  of  evidence,  and  imperfection  of  methods 
of  observation." 

Darwin's  definitions  of  nature  and  law  show  that  he  was  anxious 
to  avoid  the  metaphysical  problems.  "  I  mean  by  nature  only  the 
aggregation  and  product  of  many  natural  laws,  —  and  by  laws  only 
the  ascertained  sequence  of  events." 

In  Draper's  "Intellectual  Development  of  Europe,"  the  first 
chapter  contains  a  discussion  of  law  in  human  affairs. 

Quatrefages,  in  "  The  Human  Species,"  Book  I.,  chapter  i.,  rec- 
ognizes the  relation  of  man  to  the  lower  animals,  but  at  the 
same  time  lays  stress  on  his  peculiarities.  '*  Is  man  distinguished 
from  animals  by  important  and  characteristic  phenomena,  abso- 
lutely unknown  in  the  latter  ?  For  more  than  forty  yeai-s  I  have 
answered  this  question  in  the  affirmative,  and  my  convictions, 
tested  by  many  controversies,  are  now  stronger  than  ever."  He 
puts  the  human  phenomena  in  a  sjiecial  kingdom,  declaring  them 
to  be  "  the  attributes  of  a  kingdom  which  we  call  the  Human  King- 
dom." Anthropology  has  "  its  own  special  field  of  study,  and  on 
that  account  alone  its  special  questions,  which  often  could  not  be 
solved  by  processes  borrowed  from  cognate  sciences."  This  does  not 
interfere  with  the  organic  unity  of  man  as  an  animal  with  the  rest 
of  the  world.  "  In  anthropology,  every  solution,  to  be  sound,  that 
is  to  say,  true,  should  refer  man,  in  everything  which  is  not  exclu- 
sively human,  to  the  generally  recognized  laws  for  other  organized 
and  living  beings." 

Schiiffle,  in  the  volume  quoted  above,  discusses  the  limits  of 
sociological  knowledge,  and  makes  frequent  mention  of  the  mate- 


IS  SOCIOLOGY  A   SCIENCE?  293 

rialistic  hypothesis,  which  he  rejects  as  untenable.  In  his  "  Ge- 
sammelte  Aufsatze,"  the  first  article  discusses  the  relation  of 
Dai-winism  to  social  science.  He  shows  that  in  reference  to  soci- 
ety the  application  of  natural  selection  is  limited. 

The  following,  from  F.  M.  Sprague's  book  on  "  The  Laws  of 
Social  Evolution,"  is  one  of  numerous  evidences  that  the  reduction 
of  Sociology  to  a  natural  science  is  deemed  a  failure.  "  The  unsuc- 
cessful but  chronic  attempt  to  explain  the  social  in  terms  of  a 
physical  organism  must  be  abandoned.  It  was  born  of  arrogant 
physicism.  It  is  an  analogical  monstrosity  and  a  grotesque  cari- 
cature of  the  scientific  method.  The  social  organism  is  based  on 
mind,  the  physical  organism  on  matter.  The  properties  of  matter 
cannot  be  compared  with  those  of  mind." 

Our  position  is  thus  clear.  In  the  interest  of  true  science  we 
demand  the  rejection  of  all  false  scientific  assumptions.  Not  the 
least  objection  is  urged  against  making  Sociology  as  positive  or 
scientific  as  possible ;  we  in  fact  insist  on  this,  but  we  distinguish 
between  this  and  the  adoption  of  a  system  of  sj)eculative  and  meta- 
physical philosophy  as  the  basis  of  Sociology,  then  making  this 
philosophy  a  species  of  dogmatism,  adherence  to  which  is  made 
the  condition  of  science !  In  order  to  avoid  this,  a  former  chapter 
has  urged  the  separation  of  Sociology  from  all  adulterating  admix- 
tures and  confusing  entanglements. 

Let  natural  law  be  applied  to  society  so  far  as  possible.  But 
after  it  has  explained  all  within  its  reach,  let  the  peculiarity  of 
psychological,  personal,  and  sociological  factors  be  acknowledged. 
If  these  factors  are  mysterious,  let  us  say  so,  without  professing  to 
explain  them  by  simply  hiding  them  under  still  greater  mysteries. 
Thus  we  shall  gain  as  much  as  liy  dogmatic  assumptions,  while  our 
method  wiU  be  scientific,  which  the  other  is  not. 

In  order  to  test  the  correctness  of  the  views  here  given,  the  stu- 
dent is  requested  to  examine  the  sociological  works  from  Comte 
till  the  present.  They  have  scientific  elements  and  aim  at  positive 
knowledge,  and  this  knowledge  they  seek  to  reduce  to  system. 
But  so  far  as  scientific  knowledge  is  concerned,  knowledge  gained 
by  means  of  the  scientific  method,  knowledge  as  exact  as  natural 
science,  absolute  and  final,  it  forms  a  small  fraction  of  the  works. 
They  abound  in  description  and  historic  references,  in  presupposi- 
tions and  theories  and  surmises,  and  sometimes  a  whole  system  of 
speculative  philosophy  is  suddenly  thrust  as  science  on  the  unsus- 


294     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

pecting  student.  Those  who  come  to  the  study  with  different 
presuppositions  and  a  different  psychology,  also  give  different  in- 
terpretations of  the  same  social  phenomena.  Hence,  instead  of 
strict  science,  which  is  indisputable  and  has  objective  validity  for 
all,  we  have  tentative  scientific  efforts,  and,  in  many  instances, 
a  conglomerate  mass  whose  chaotic  state  is  its  most  striking 
characteristic. 

Is  Sociology  a  science  ?  Yes  and  no.  It  is  not  a  science  yet  in 
any  sense  ;  it  has  not  the  conditions  for  a  mathematical  or  physical 
science.  Some  of  its  material  can  be  made  more  strictly  scientific 
than  the  rest.  Taking  all  its  material  into  account,  we  ai'e  war- 
ranted in  saying  that  it  can  be  made  scientific  in  the  sense  of  valid 
and  systematized  knowledge.  Even  in  this  sense  we  are  now 
obliged  to  regard  Sociology  as  but  tentatively  the  science  of 
society. 

A  fuller  discussion  of  various  points  in  tliis  chapter  are  found  in 
the  following  books  of  the  author :  "  Introduction  to  the  Study  of 
Philosophy,"  chapter  iii.,  Philosophy  and  Science ;  "  The  Life  of 
Immanuel  Kant,"  chapters  viii.  and  ix;  and  "Tendencies  in  Ger- 
man Thought,"  second  and  third  lectures  on  "  Tendencies  in  Ger- 
man Philosophy." 

In  "  Essays  in  Philosophical  Criticism,"  edited  by  Seth  and 
Haldane,  the  second  essay,  by  R.  D.  Haldane,  is  on  "  The  Relation 
of  Philosophy  to  Science." 

REFLECTIONS. 

Different  Meanings  of  the  Term  "  Science."  Technical  and 
Popular  Use.  Difference  between  Science  and  Philosophy. 
Scientific  Method  as  determining  the  Scientific  Character  of 
Disciplines.  Exactness  and  Certainty  in  Natural  and  Human 
Affairs.  In  Tvhat  Sense  is  Sociology  a  Science  ?  The  Factors 
in  Sociology  w^hich  yield  the  most  Scientific  Data.  Is  Ma- 
terialism Scientific  ?  Tentative  Character  of  Sociology  as  a 
Science.      Review  of  the  Chapter. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  ISTUDY  OF  THE  AGE.      295 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE    SOCIOLOGICAL    STUDY    OF    THE    AGE. 

The  Problem.  Special  interest  attaches  to  our  oivn  age. 
It  is  the  culmination  of  the  entire  j^focess  of  evolution; 
the  past  is  known  to  us  only  as  its  results  have  come 
doivn  to  our  time ;  we  have  direct  contact  tvith  the  age, 
are  part  of  it,  and  can  hy  means  of  personal  observation 
study  its  sociological  character ;  and  then  it  is  the  only 
age  whose  society  immediately  affects  us  and  whose  social 
affairs  ive  can  directly  help  to  mould. 

What  is  the  sociological  character  of  the  age?  What 
societies  exist  and  how  are  they  related  to  one  another? 
Amid  the  varied  factors  of  our  social  life,  none  of  the 
forces  of  the  past  are  wanting  :  but  our  problem  pertains 
to  the  degree  of  development  attained  by  them,  how  they 
are  correlated  and  tvhat  their  interaction  is,  and  which 
forces  are  dominant,  which  subordinate.  We  aim  at  the 
sociological  characteristics  of  the  times. 

Especially  for  ethics  is  a  knowledge  of  the  social  forces 
and  needs  important.  We  must  learn  the  social  needs 
and  demands  in  order  to  supply  them  ;  we  must  know 
the  social  forces  in  order  to  use  them ;  and  we  must 
understand  the  social  aspirations  in  order  to  direct  them. 
Particularly  worthy  of  study  are  certain  great  economic 
movements,  such  as  communism,  socialism,  and  indi- 
vidualism. The  importance  of  viewing  these  subjects 
sociologically    consists    in    the    fact    that   in   this    ivay 


296     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  pernicious  partial  and  partisan  tendencies  can  be 
overcome. 

In  his  own  country  the  American  student  ivill  find 
some  of  the  most  fruitful  as  well  as  most  momentous 
sociological  questions  of  the  day. 

Tlie  social  humanity  of  the  aye,  ivhat  it  is,  hoiv  it 
became  what  it  is,  and  ivhither  it  tends,  —  that  is  the 
problem. 

Weighty  reasons  have  led  to  the  discussion  of  this 
subject.  The  sociological  study  of  the  age  will  give  the 
student  an  opportunity  of  applying  the  principles  enun- 
ciated in  the  preceding  pages  to  his  own  environment 
and  times.  Besides  thus  fixing  the  principles  more 
definitely  and  more  firmly  in  his  mind,  he  will  be  led 
into  the  social  realism  of  the  day.  From  the  sociologi- 
cal interpretation  of  the  age  he  can  turn  back  to  the 
past  and  trace  the  genesis  of  society  as  it  now  is,  and 
to  the  future  to  consider  what  conditions  are  required 
for  social  progress.  Even  though  we  are  obliged  to 
limit  our  investigation  to  general  outlines,  they  may 
be  guides  for  the  study  of  a  lifetime. 

Just  what  is  aimed  at  is  the  first  question.  If  we 
consider  the  whole  of  humanity  as  it  exists  at  this 
particular  time,  w^e  are  at  once  impressed  how  small  a 
portion  of  it  we  know  or  can  know  with  any  degree  of 
thoroughness.  There  are  vast  regions,  including  many 
millions  of  inhabitants,  of  which  our  knowledge  is  very 
imperfect.  Even  Americans  and  Europeans,  with  rare 
exce[)tions,  do  not  understand  each  other.  To  scholars 
themselves  much  in  America,  in  Russia  and  the  Balkan 
States,  in  China,  India,  and  other  parts  of  Asia,  in 
Japan  and  Africa,  has  to  be  classed  as  terra  incognita. 
So  soon  as  we  consider  the  question  of  details,  we  find 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       297 

that  at  best  our  knowledge  is  vagiie  in  proportion  as  it 
is  comprehensive.  Only  among  the  advanced  nations 
do  we  find  trustworthy  statistics ;  so  that  so  simple  a 
fact  as  the  number  of  people  on  the  globe,  on  continents, 
and  in  nations  has  to  be  estimated  or  guessed.^ 

In  a  limited  sphere  our  knowledge  may  be  tolerably 
definite,  as  in  our  immediate  environment,  state,  or  na- 
tion. Other  countries  may  be  visited,  or  detailed  accounts 
of  them  are  accessible.  But  taking  the  society  of  our 
age  as  a  whole,  we  find  ourselves  limited  to  gen- 
eral features.  Some  particular  parts  can  be  taken  for 
special  study  because  they  most  nearly  concern  us,  or 
are  of  most  importance  for  understanding  the  age. 
Thus  a  study  of  the  enlightened  nations  reveals  the 
progress  attained  throughout  the  process  of   evolution. 

For  the  sake  of  his  own  discipline  as  well  as  for  the 
knowledge  to  be  gained,  the  student  ought  to  make  a 
thorough  personal  investigation  of  some  society  or 
societies.     In  general,  however,  the  aim  should  be  to 

^  The  population  of  the  globe  is  supposed  to  be  between  fourteen  and 
fifteen  hundred  millions,  more  than  twenty  times  as  many  as  there  are 
inhabitants  in  the  United  States.  The  births  are  from  forty  to  fifty 
millions  annually,  the  deaths  somewhat  less  than  the  births.  Not  only 
are  these  numbers  too  large  for  definite  conception,  but  there  is  no  pos- 
sibility of  making  them  exact,  on  account  of  the  lack  of  statistics  outside 
of  Europe  and  America.  How  limited  our  knowledge  of  the  world's 
social  condition  is  becomes  evident  so  soon  as  we  reflect  on  our  ignorance 
respecting  our  own  people  and  other  enlightened  nations,  which  con- 
stitute but  a  fraction  of  humanity ;  of  the  rest  our  ignorance  is  still  more 
dense.  Unless  a  specialty  is  made  of  the  subject,  it  is  safe  to  say  that 
of  more  than  nine-tenths  of  the  world's  inhabitants  even  scholars  have 
not  an  intelligent  general  conception.  In  confirmation  of  this  we  need 
but  look  at  the  distribution  of  these  inhabitants:  America,  120,000,000; 
Europe,  369,000,000;  Asia,  800,000,000;  Africa,  200,000,000.  Most 
students  know  even  North  America  and  Western  Europe  very  imper- 
fectly ;  South  America  and  Eastern  Europe  are  obscure,  while  extremely 
vague  notions  prevail  respecting  A.sia,  Africa,  and  the  islands  of  the  sea, 
containing  over  two-thirds  of  the  populatiun  of  the  globe. 


298     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

get  the  dominant  characteristics  of  the  age  in  which 
the  character  of  society  is  embodied.  The  study  of 
the  age  is  largely  a  study  of  its  purposes,  of  the  objects 
which  attract  men,  of  the  needs  which  they  feel  most 
deeply,  of  the  motives  of  action.  In  these  we  behold 
the  Zeitgeist^  to  which  other  things  are  subordinate. 
A  society  may  express  its  heart  in  a  single  trend.  At 
the  same  time  other  motives  come  in  and  modify  the 
dominant  ones.  Nations  are  often  unjust  to  one  an- 
other because  the  whole  nation  and  all  the  affairs  of  the 
nation  are  judged  by  some  general  characteristic,  as 
when  Germany  is  apprehended  as  merely  a  military 
power,  England  as  a  nation  of  shop-keepers,  and  the 
United  States  as  a  moral  (or  immoral)  wilderness  in 
which  the  golden  calf  is  worshipped. 

The  study  of  the  advanced  nations  is  most  important. 
The  lower  peoples  represent  types  which  have  been 
found,  with  some  variations,  in  other  ages.  For  the 
characteristics  of  the  times  we  look  chiefly  to  the  civ- 
ilized states.  Not  that  the  lower  stages  of  culture 
are  to  be  neglected.  A  panorama  of  existing  peoples, 
passing  in  regular  gradation  from  the  lowest  to  the 
highest  culture,  would  present  many  of  the  most  essen- 
tial characteristics  of  the  world's  history.  For  the 
enlightened  of  the  age  this  study  of  the  lower  existing 
forms  of  society  has  a  direct  significance  :  they  behold 
the  various  stages  through  which  their  ancestors  passed 
and  through  which  the  ages  have  pushed  their  way  to 
our  age.  In  the  Indo-Gcrmanic  languages,  literatures, 
and  history,  many  deposits  of  the  various  stages  of 
development  are  distinctly  seen.  In  many  higher  forms 
of  culture  wc  have  survivals  or  })roducts  of  the  lower, 
and  in  their  genesis  we  have  conditions  for  their  inter- 
pretation.    For  another  reason  also  this  study  is  im- 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       299 

portant.  The  inferior  races  are  engaging  the  attention 
and  enlisting  the  energies  of  the  advanced  nations. 
They  are  affected  by  the  civilization  with  which  they 
come  in  contact;  but  they,  in  turn,  influence  civilized 
lands,  and  this  influence  is  likely  to  grow  with  their 
culture. 

The  times  are  peculiarly  favorable  for  the  sociologi- 
cal study  of  our  age.  Science,  fame  and  adventure  have 
led  men  to  explore  the  habitable  parts  of  the  globe  and  to 
penetrate  regions  heretofore  deemed  inaccessible ;  the 
darkest  realms  have  attracted  missionaries,  because  in 
greatest  contrast  with  the  light  they  brought ;  the  indus- 
trial nations  make  the  world  their  market,  and  their  com- 
merce, freighted  with  blessings  and  curses,  seeks  the 
peoples  by  the  seas,  and  traverses  valleys  and  moun- 
tains to  find  those  that  are  inland.  The  world's  postal 
and  telegraph  arrangements,  the  ease  of  communication, 
the  frequency  of  travel,  have  done  their  part  to  make 
the  world  know  the  world.  Colonization  aids  in  this 
spread  of  knowledge.  The  great  interests  and  move- 
ments of  our  times  bring  the  leading  states  into  close 
relations.  The  stronger  care  for  the  weaker,  as  the 
large  fish  of  the  sea  do  for  the  small.  A  few  nations 
rule  the  world,  not  because  requested,  but  because  they 
find  it  to  their  interest  and  have  the  power.  This 
makes  diplomacy  active  and  puts  a  premium  on  such 
knowledge  as  will  give  one  nation  an  advantage  over 
another.  The  peoples  watch  and  study  one  another, 
in  order  to  obtain  the  requisite  knowledge  for  their 
economic  and  political  affairs. 

The  growing  intimacy  of  nations  has  promoted  simi- 
larity. In  Russia,  Poland,  Bohemia,  Hungary,  Ger- 
many, Greece,  Italy,  Ireland,  and  other  lands,  the 
development  of  the  consciousness  of  nationality  during 


300     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

the  century  has  been  marked.  But  parallel  with  this 
has  also  been  the  development  of  cosmopolitanism. 
Internationalism  has  grown  as  well  as  nationalism, 
and  men  can  go  abroad  and  feel  at  home.  A  monot- 
onous sameness  is  even  complained  of  as  characteristic 
of  the  great  cities  of  different  countries. 

The  same  trend  is  seen  in  scholarship,  in  literature, 
in  inventions.  Genius  now  thinks,  writes,  and  invents 
for  the  world.  Thanks  to  the  post  and  telegraph  offices 
and  the  press,  important  discoveries,  inventions,  and 
movements  are  at  once  communicated  to  all  nations. 
The  people  generally  take  a  deeper  interest  in  the 
world's  affairs  as  education  spreads  and  they  them- 
selves receive  a  share  in  the  government. 

These  facts  show  what  advantages  are  offered  to  the 
sociological  student  for  the  study  of  the  age.  A  knowl- 
edge of  the  nations  whose  characteristics  are  of  most 
value  to  him  is  within  his  reach.  By  studying  the  Euro- 
pean and  American  nations  which  are  in  the  van,  he 
will  learn  the  most  striking  features  of  the  age,  the 
peculiarities  which  distinguish  our  times  from  the  past, 
and  also  the  most  potent  influences  to  which  the  other 
nations  and  peoples  are  subject. 

"With  so  large  a  field  before  him,  and  with  details  of 
such  bewildering  variety  and  multiplicity,  a  systematic 
plan  of  study  is  indispensable.  How  can  he  master  the 
subject  ? 

Every  sociologist  must  be  gratified  by  the  popular  in- 
terest in  his  specialty  ;  but  he  ought  to  insist  on  main- 
taining its  scientific  character.  For  this  reason  we 
emphasize  Sociology  as  a  system,  and  treat  as  sociologi- 
cal only  such  social  material  as  forms  part  of  the  system. 
Isolated  social  data  are  not  sociological,  but  they  may 
become  so  through  systematic  correlation.     Keeping  in 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL   STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       301 

view  the  distinction  between  social  and  sociological,  the 
student  will  perceive  that  by  the  sociological  study  of 
the  age  we  mean  such  an  investigation  as  will  give  a 
knowledge  of  the  existing  society,  of  the  social  systems 
which  prevail,  of  the  associative  energies  of  the  times, 
and  of  the  organism  they  form.  A  social  fact  is  to  the 
sociologist  what  a  stone  is  to  the  geologist.  Not  as  iso- 
lated phenomena  does  he  view  the  murder  of  Alexander 
II.,  of  Carnot,  and  of  Canovas,  but  so  far  as  the  nihilism 
or  anarchism  in  the  deeds  have  their  cause  in  society. 

What  was  said  under  Sociation  leaves  no  doubt  that 
the  social  forces  are  the  special  objects  of  investigation. 
We  must  consider  the  individuals  of  the  times  in  order 
to  understand  the  association  of  the  age ;  but  we  con- 
sider them  as  the  possessors  of  the  social  energies. 

Thus  it  is  claimed  by  a  specialist  on  the  character- 
istics of  the  age  that  more  stress  should  be  placed  on 
feeling  than  is  usually  done  by  students.  He  holds  that 
feeling,  as  the  basis  of  taste,  inclination,  and  disposition, 
determines  the  course  of  the  intellect  and  the  will.  This 
places  peculiar  stress  on  feeling  as  a  social  energy.  Is 
it  true  that  now  society  is  dominated  by  emotional  im- 
pulse rather  tlian  by  rational  considerations,  dogmas, 
and  theories  ?  If  so,  then  the  kind  of  feeling  which  is 
dominant  becomes  one  of  the  most  important  problems. 

On  the  principle  that  the  dominant  interest  determines 
the  focus  of  thought,  the  social  element  in  the  literature 
of  the  past  has  become  an  object  of  inquiry.  In  the  lit- 
erature of  our  age  the  social  factor  is  a  constantly  in- 
creasing quantity.  Much  in  it,  however,  will  strike  as 
strange  the  sociologist  who  has  apprehended  the  social 
energies  as  the  essence.  For  the  sociological  study  of  a 
nation,  the  nativity  of  its  inhabitants,  on  which  many  lay 
great  stress,  may  be  to  little  purpose.     The  more  homo- 


302     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

geneous  a  people,  the  more  valuable  their  nativity  in 
sociological  study ;  but  if  the  dii^ferentiations  are  great, 
the  nativity  cannot  be  regarded  as  a  mark  of  character. 
There  is  some  value  in  the  statistics  in  America  of  Chi- 
nese, Italians,  and  Irish  in  this  respect,  because  signi- 
ficant traits  are  general  among  these  peoples.  Less 
importance  is  to  be  attached  to  immigrants  from  Russia, 
with  its  120,000,000  inhabitants.  Are  they  Stundists, 
Lutherans,  Baptists,  or  of  the  orthodox  faith  ?  Perhaps 
they  are  expelled  Jews,  or  nihilists,  or  followers  of 
Tolstoi.  Still  less  valuable  for  social  study  are  the  sta- 
tistics of  Germans  and  their  descendants.  There  are 
nearly  a  score  of  factions  in  the  German  Parliament,  rep- 
resenting numerous  phases  of  economics,  of  revolution- 
ary, republican,  and  monarchical  views  ;  and  yet  many 
throughout  the  empire  may  claim  that  their  views  are 
not  represented.  The  religious  sentiments  vary  from 
avowed  atheism,  based  on  bald  materialism,  to  ultra- 
montanism.  When  accordingly  it  is  said  that  a  certain 
percentage  of  American  citizens  are  of  German  origin, 
it  does  not  reveal  their  character.  Bismarck  once 
lamented  that  his  countrymen  so  readily  adopted  the 
characteristics  of  the  people  among  whom  they  settled. 
But  aside  from  their  Americanization  which  wipes  out 
past  peculiarities,  the  difference  in  the  immigrants  them- 
selves must  be  considered.  The  Pennsylvania  Germans 
are  a  type  by  themselves.  Later  immigration  has 
brought  numerous  other  varieties.  In  the  early  part  of 
the  century  came  the  Missouri  Lutherans  of  hyper- 
orthodoxy  ;  1848  brought  freethinkers  ;  then  followed  a 
strong  tide  of  immigrants  from  Catholic  districts;  since 
then  social  democrats  have  come  in  large  numbers. 
With  this  variety,  representing  diverging  religious,  polit- 
ical, and  industrial  types,  what  definite  notion  is  given 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF   THE  AGE.       303 

when  the  statistics  of  Germans  in  the  United  States  is 
given?  It  means  little  even  to  say  that  a  man  is  a  na- 
tive American.  Is  he  a  Yankee  ?  There  are  Yankees 
and  Yankees,  an  endless  diversity.  Is  he  from  the 
South  ?  From  the  West  ?  It  has  even  been  questioned 
whether  a  distinct  American  type  has  been  developed. 
Even  to  state  his  religion,  politics,  and  industrial  pursuit, 
may  give  but  a  vague  notion  of  the  man. 

This  vagueness  is  overcome  when,  instead  of  number- 
ing persons,  we  seize  what  actually  constitutes  society, 
the  social  forces.  In  this  way  we  master  what  actually 
determines  association,  and  drop  all  foreign  elements. 
Whatever  nationality  may  mean  or  not  mean,  the  social 
forces  mean  everything.  Classified  according  to  their 
social  energies,  large  bodies  of  Germans  will  be  placed 
with  certain  other  foreigners  and  with  certain  native 
Americans,  rather  than  with  the  rest  of  their  country- 
men. 

In  the  sociological  study  of  the  existing  social  forces 
we  investigate  them  not  as  isolated,  but  as  organically 
connected,  as  co-operative.  This  must  be  remembered 
in  order  not  to  lose  ourselves  in  a  social  science,  instead 
of  confining  ourselves  to  the  social  science. 

With  the  whole  of  humanity  before  us  various  classifi- 
cations of  society  are  possible.  The  study  according  to 
races  is  vague.  The  racial  bounds  are  not  sharply 
drawn ;  even  the  number  of  races  is  in  dispute.  Besides, 
marked  differences  are  found  in  the  same  race.  There 
are  advantages  in  the  division  according  to  religion ;  but 
even  when  we  consider  the  highest  religions,  Avhat  a 
confusing  variety  in  different  nations!  The  adherents 
of  Christianity  would  have  to  be  put  into  various  classes 
in  order  to  get  a  definite  idea  of  them.  A  more  satis- 
factory division  is  possible  according  to  the  degree  of  cul- 


304     INTrxODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ture  attained.  As  a  general  classificatiou  we  have  the 
barbarous,  the  semi-civilized,  the  civilized,  and  then  we 
might  add  the  most  enlightened.  But  each  of  these  di- 
visions requires  numerous  sub-divisions.  In  each  stage 
of  progress,  however,  certain  social  forces  are  dominant 
and  determine  characteristics  of  the  peoples  belonging 
to  that  stage. 

If  we  confine  our  sociological  inquiries  to  the  most 
advanced  nations  as  of  supreme  importance,  we  concen- 
trate our  attention  on  Europe  and  America,  particularly 
the  western  part  of  the  former  and  the  northern  of  the 
latter.  Their  religion,  their  education,  their  politics, 
their  industrial  pursuits,  their  intimate  relations  and  in- 
fluence on  one  another,  and  their  general  trend  give  cer- 
tain common  characteristics  which  enable  us  to  study 
them  together. 

Taking  these  nations  as  a  whole,  the  most  dominant 
trend  is  toward  Objective  Realisyn?- 

By  this  we  mean  that  they  seek  something  objective  ; 
no  longer  satisfied  with  subjective  notions,  they  demand 
reality  in  the  ordinary  sense.  Objective  reality  being 
made  the  supreme  aim,  it  becomes  the  test  of  faith, 
hope,  and  all  religious  conceptions  and  mental  products. 
Hence  historical  and  biblical  criticism ;  the  emphasis 
was  formerly  placed  on  ivhat  men  believed,  but  now  it  is 
on  the  grounds  of  belief.  So  many  opinions  have  been 
found  to  rest  on  imagination  that  the  age  has  become 
suspicious  not  only  in  religious  matters.  General  scep- 
ticism and  agnosticism   respecting   the  foundations  of 

1  For  a  fuller  discussion  of  the  subject  the  author  refers  to  his  volume 
on  "  The  Age  and  tlie  Cliurch."  The  Appendix  contains  "  The  Study  of 
the  Age,"  giving  the  method  and  means  of  the  study.  The  Principles  in- 
volved in  the  study  are  found  in  tiie  first  chapter  of  the  book.  The  sec- 
ond and  tliird  chapters  discuss  "Tlie  Characteristics  of  the  Age." 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL   STUDY  OF   THE  AGE.       305 

knowledge  make  ours  a  transition  era  in  intellect. 
While  objectiAX  realism  is  sought  as  the  bottom  rock, 
the  trend  appears  with  different  force  and  in  various 
forms  among  the  advanced  nations,  and  the  counteract- 
ing influences  also  vary  greatly ;  but  that  trend  is  the 
most  distinctive  fundamental  feature  of  our  times. 

The  creation  and  promotion  of  this  trend  are  largely 
due  to  the  intellectual  place  and  popular  influence  of 
natural  science.^  This  has  also  had  a  large  share  in 
determining  the  most  striking  characteristic  in  this 
general  trend.  What  kind  of  objective  reality  do  men 
seek  ?  Not  that  of  the  next  world  and  in  the  future,  but 
here  and  now.  This-worldliness,  this-sidedness  are  the 
new  terms  which  characterize  the  tendency.  Hence 
theoretical  materialism ;  hence  practical  materialism  even 
where  the  theoretical  is  rejected ;  hence  realism  in  art 
and  literature ;  hence  the  prevalence  of  industrialism, 
economics,  capitalism ;  hence  material  welfare  as  the 
great  concern  of   politics  and   the   daily   press ;  hence 

1  The  nineteenth  century  has  frequently  been  called  the  century  of 
natural  science.  This  has  been  justified  by  the  remarkable  achievements 
in  this  department,  and  by  the  inventions  and  practical  results  which  fol- 
lowed. The  effects  produced  arrested  the  popular  attention,  affected  the 
method  of  research,  gave  new  conceptions  of  the  universe,  and  deeply  in- 
fluenced all  departments  of  thought.  But  an  exclusive  predominance  of 
natural  science  cannot  be  claimed.  Historians  affirm  that  the  advance  in 
their  specialty  is  no  less  marked.  For  proof  they  point  to  the  archives 
which  have  been  opened  during  the  century,  to  the  extensive  excavations 
of  buried  remains  in  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  and  America,  to  the  decipher- 
ing of  inscriptions  unread  for  thousands  of  years,  to  the  numerous  histori- 
cal works  of  great  excellence  in  various  languages  and  in  all  departments 
of  research,  and  to  the  progress  in  historiography.  In  no  department  of 
learning  is  the  claim  to  exclusive  predominance  justified.  Progress  can 
be  claimed  in  economics  and  political  ."cience,  as  well  as  in  natural  science 
and  history.  A  mighty  impulse  has  been  given  to  empirical  investiga- 
tions, particularh'  to  such  as  have  a  direct  bearing  on  industrial  and 
social  life. 

20 


306     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

revolutionary  socialism,  so  far  as  it  makes  political 
economy  the  social  science  on  which  life  and  society 
depend.  Here,  then,  we  have  the  fruit  of  the  factory,  of 
steam  and  electricity,  of  inventions,  and  of  that  marvel- 
lous industrial  development  which  has  transformed  the 
world. 

Intimately  connected  with  this  materialistic  and  realis- 
tic trend  is  the  decline  of  philosophy  where  once  the 
dominant  intellectual  pursuit ;  the  prevalence  of  history 
as  dealing  with  facts ;  the  preference  of  sensationalism 
and  empiricism  over  intellectual  rationalism  and  specu- 
lation ;  the  attempt  to  reduce  Sociology,  ethics,  and  all 
human  affairs  to  natural  law ;  the  absorbing  pursuit  of 
earthly  pleasure  or  happiness  as  the  aim  of  life. 

The  new  studies,  interests,  and  developments  have 
stimulated  life  in  general.  The  age  is  characterized  by 
marvellous  activity.  New  subjects  have  been  developed, 
religion  has  been  energized  by  the  very  opposition  it  has 
encountered.  The  conflicts  of  thought,  of  education,  of 
faith,  of  life,  have  prevented  stagnation  and  promoted 
energy.  Hence  the  variety  of  activities  in  modern 
society. 

A  reaction  against  the  naturalistic  trend  has  set  in. 
It  is  felt  in  France,  where  realism  celebrated  its  greatest 
triumphs  in  art  and  literature.  Philosophy  has  received 
fresh  impulses  in  Germany,  and  in  that  land  of  ideals 
one  hears  less  now  than  quite  recently  the  comj)laint  that 
the  ideals  have  vanished. 

We  thus  find  a  dominance  of  economic  forces  in 
society ;  the  political  forces  largely  subject  to  the  eco- 
nomic ;  with  a  strong  trend  towards  hedonism  in  ethics  ; 
with  education,  art,  literature,  and  the  church  deeply 
affected  by  the  mammonistic  spirit.  The  subordination 
of  higher  interests,  the  crushing   out   of  faith   by  tlie 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL   STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       307 

weight  of  crass  materialism,  the  satiety  wrought  by 
pleasure,  the  contrast  of  realizations  with  the  ideals 
and  aspirations  of  modern  life,  and  the  sensitiveness 
of  our  culture,  produce  that  pessimism  which  has 
become  so  common  in  certain  circles,  so  that  men 
wonder,  particularly  in  emergencies,  whether  life  is 
worth  living. 

In  Germany  and  France,  in  England  and  the  United 
States,  the  social  forces  here  indicated  are  found  in  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  intensity,  with  peculiar  manifestations 
in  each,  and  with  a  variety  of  forces  trying  to  counter- 
act or  modify  the  dominant  ones.  The  rise  of  Germany 
to  a  leading  economic  nation  is  a  sign  of  the  times.  In 
spite  of  its  militarism  and  educational  interests,  it  is  now 
attempting  with  remarkable  success  to  rival  the  first 
industrial  nations  in  production  and  commerce. 

Those  who  rely  on  the  continued  supremacy  of  a  par- 
ticular force  may  build  on  a  sandy  foundation.  Soon, 
or  in  the  course  of  time,  the  dominance  may  be  trans- 
ferred to  other  energies.  Our  age  of  fermentation  teems 
with  transformations.  Past  impulses  continue  traditional 
courses,  but  these  are  met  by  strong  counter-movements. 
It  is  one  of  the  firmest  convictions  of  the  age  that  momen- 
tous changes  are  inevitable.  The  demand  is  imperative 
that  things  be  dethroned  that  man  may  be  enthroned ; 
the  emphasis  is  being  shifted  from  objective  realism  to 
the  claims  of  the  heart  and  the  conscience,  of  reason, 
faith,  and  hope ;  and  abnormal  and  partisan  tendencies 
will  be  doomed  in  exact  proportion  as  Sociology,  with 
its  stress  on  all  the  social  energies  and  on  society  as  a 
unity,  is  promoted.  The  consciousness  of  existing  evils 
is  the  condition  for  overcoming  them  ;  and  this  conscious- 
ness is  being  deeply  developed.  That  peoples  can  be 
lifted  to  a  higher  plane  of  thought  and  life  is  evident 


308     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

when  some  great  interest  is  to  be  conserved,  when 
slavery  is  to  be  abolished,  when  national  unity  and  safety 
are  to  be  achieved,  or  when  a  faith  dearer  than  life  is  to 
be  maintained. 

This  struggle  for  existence,  for  earthly  being  and  well- 
being,  with  its  fierce  competition,  with  means  often  so 
brutal  as  to  trample  on  persons  for  the  sake  of  getting 
things,  could  be  traced,  with  its  attendant  forces, 
through  various  phases  of  social  life.  That  there  are 
many  social  groups  and  organizations  in  which  higher 
aims,  intellectual,  ethical,  religions,  are  dominant,  is 
fully  admitted ;  we  are  only  speaking  of  what  is  of  most 
general  prominence. 

We  cannot  investigate,  but  only  indicate,  other  plans 
of  study.  Different  forms  of  organization  and  associa- 
tion can  be  taken  up  for  special  inquiry.  The  aristoc- 
racy can  be  examined,  whether  of  birth,  of  wealth,  or  of 
intellect ;  the  middle  class,  and  laborers.  Particularly 
in  the  rising,  the  solidarity,  the  internationalism,  and  the 
trend,  of  laborers  is  much  of  the  age  reflected.  This 
pressing  upward  from  the  lowest  social  stratum  suggests 
the  uprising  of  the  people  at  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution.  But  what  was  a  local  volcano  a  century 
ago  has  now  become  an  earthquake  shaking  all  the 
enlightened  nations.  The  materialistic  element  is  prom- 
inent in  the  social  agitations  of  the  masses,  but  there 
are  also  ideal  factors  in  the  aspiration  to  rise  to  a  better 
condition. 

Besides  the  general  characteristics  of  the  age  which 
permeate  all  its  social  forms,  we  can  specialize  on  par- 
ticular associations  and  institutions.  Too  much  stress 
can  hardly  be  laid  on  the  family,  the  social  nucleus. 
The  sacredness  of  the  family  relation,  the  theories  of 
marriage  and  divorce,  and  the  laws  on  these  subjects. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL   STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       309 

the  actual  family  life,  all  are  important.  Worthy  of 
special  study  also  are  the  school,  the  church,  politics, 
the  ethical,  literary,  scientific,  philosophical,  and  aesthetic 
societies.  Their  power  as  a  concentration  of  specific 
energies  is  the  object  of  the  investigation.  For  thor- 
ough knowledge  the  organizations  and  institutions  must 
of  course  be  studied  in  their  genesis  and  correlations. 

Astonishing  results  will  likely  be  discovered  by  the 
student  who  distinguishes  between  Avhat  the  society  of 
the  day  has  inherited  and  what  it  adds  to  this  inherit- 
ance through  its  own  achievements.  Owing  to  another 
of  those  pernicious  and  undiscriminating  generaliza- 
tions, we  credit  existing  society  with  excellences  which 
are  not  its  own  creation.  We  glory  in  the  advance  of 
society  over  the  past,  when  its  very  superiority  may 
consist  in  the  contributions  made  by  the  past.  This 
becomes  evident  when  we  distinguish  between  the  treas- 
ures transmitted  to  society,  and  the  mechanism  in  which 
it  moves,  on  the  one  liand,  and  the  actual  social  forces 
exerted  by  the  members  of  society,  on  the  other.  It  is 
like  the  etiquette  of  a  court :  it  has  a  polite  and  refined 
mechanism  in  which  each  is  obliged  to  move,  a  mechan- 
ism so  dominant  that  it  is  calculated  to  hide  the  weak- 
ness, the  inanity,  the  vice,  and  even  brutality,  of  such  as 
are  admitted  into  the  first  society  of  the  land.  Why 
emphasize  the  substance  when  the  form  is  everything  ? 

Are  the  social  forces  of  the  age  really  an  advance 
over  the  past,  better  in  quality,  of  greater  degree,  of 
more  vigorous  interaction  than  in  former  times,  or  is  the 
advance  in  the  inheritances  from  the  past  ?  When  so 
generally  ours  is  designated  as  an  era  of  decadence,  it 
surely  cannot  mean  that  there  is  a  decrease  in  what  has 
been  transmitted  to  us. 

It  may  be  a  question  whether  there  is  not  danger  of 


310     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

over-organization  or  of  over-socialization.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  certain  communistic  and  socialistic 
tendencies  do  not  sufficiently  respect  individual  rights 
and  peculiarities.  A  decay  of  individuality  is  com- 
plained of ;  in  free  countries  public  opinion  is  the  new 
despot  which  enslaves  the  personality.  As  in  some 
places  the  government  has  heretofore  left  to  individuals 
what  should  have  been  settled  by  law,  now  the  reaction 
may  tend  to  a  paternalism  which  seeks  to  do  everything 
for  the  people  and  leave  nothing  for  them  to  do  for 
themselves.  Legal  enactments  have  their  limits;  they 
are  no  substitute  for  character  and  will. 

The  tendency  to  organize  the  social  forces  is  very 
marked.  An  idea,  a  dogma,  a  purpose,  a  conscious 
need,  becomes  the  nucleus  of  an  organization.  In  this 
century  of  organizations  —  religious,  industrial,  politi- 
cal, literary,  scientific  —  is  there  not  danger  of  consign- 
ing to  associations,  committees,  clubs,  what  can  only  be 
done  by  individuals  ?  We  are  liable  to  forget  that  the 
social  forces,  even  in  organizations,  are  individual  forces 
in  interaction  and  depend  on  individual  character  and 
energy  for  their  efficiency.  Tlie  individual  is  enervated 
if  he  dwindles  into  insignificance  compared  with  the 
power  of  organization.  Yet  we  must  look  to  strong 
personalities  for  creative  forces  and  initiative  efforts. 
The  association  represents  the  average ;  it  is  composed 
of  what  enters  into  the  interaction  of  forces.  What  is 
highest  and  best  may  be  individual,  not  social ;  then  it 
can  be  made  social  only  if  it  is  transmitted  by  the  in- 
dividual to  society.  There  ought  to  be  a  growth  of  the 
personality  and  individuality  in  proportion  to  the  growth 
of  socialism  and  organization. 

As  the  century  culminates  and  closes,  the  effects  of 
its  marvellous  activity  and  development  become  appar- 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       311 

ent.  Distraction  is  one  of  the  characteristics  of  the 
times.  Men  are  bewildered  by  the  multiplicity  of  ob- 
jects and  interests  which  demand  their  attention.  A 
fair  sample  of  this  is  seen  in  the  daily  paper.  The 
power  of  forgetting  is  a  blessed  gift ;  what  could  a  man 
do  with  himself  if  all  the  stuff  he  reads  had  to  be  lugged 
along  ?  So  many  things  appeal  to  the  mind  and  heart 
that  men  lose  themselves.  They  are  under  constant 
strain.  Hence  they  are  excited,  nervous.  Sensations 
develop  the  taste  for  sensation ;  therefore  the  spectacu- 
lar and  sensational  must  grow  in  order  to  continue  to 
interest. 

These  characteristics  are  marks  of  modern  society. 
Men  belong  to  so  many  societies  that  they  do  not  belong 
to  themselves.^  As  new  interests  are  presented  they 
become  the  cause  of  organizations.  These  are  often 
in  conflict  with  one  another,  and  increase  the  conflicts 
and  distractions.  Especially  are  these  evident  in  the 
industries,  politics,  and  religion.  The  antagonism  be- 
tween organizations  (capitalists  and  laborers,  individ- 
ualists and  socialists,  conservatives  and  radicals  in 
politics.  Catholics  and  Protestants)  is  such  that  for  the 
sake  of  internal  peace  the  determination  of  the  relation 
of  voluntary  associations  to  one  another  and  to  the 
government  has  become  one  of  the  most  important 
functions  of  the  state. 

The  prominence  given  to  society  was  the  condition 
for  the  origin  and  rapid  development  of  Sociology.  It 
is  destined  to  revolutionize  social  theory ;  and  momen- 
tous practical   results  must  follow.     The  study  of  the 

1  I  know  of  a  lady  in  private  life  who  belongs  to  thirty-seven  societies, 
not  including  the  churcli,  the  state,  the  family,  and  unorganized  social 
circles.  There  are  no  doubt  men  and  women  who  belong  to  a  still  larger 
number. 


312     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

social  forces  will  more  and  more  lead  to  the  mastery 
of  their  use.  An  apprehension  of  the  organism  of  these 
forces  will  overcome  their  false  isolation  and  one-sided 
development,  and  promote  their  proper  correlation  and 
harmonious  development.  Already  we  are  passing  from 
a  perverted  individualism  into  a  new  social  era,  —  some 
prefer  to  say  socialistic.  We  are  beginning  to  realize 
what  the  individual  owes  to  society,  what  social  respon- 
sibility means,  and  the  need  of  socializing  of  the  indi- 
vidual what  belongs  to  society. 

Society  as  a  totality  is  coming  to  the  front,  instead 
of  societies.  We  are  learning  that  what  is  called  social 
because  in  the  interest  of  a  fractional  or  partisan  organ- 
ization, may  be  anti-social,  because  opposed  to  the  inter- 
est of  society  at  large.  A  community  of  interests  is 
recognized  as  pertaining  to  all  members  of  society.  The 
welfare  of  one  part  at  the  expense  of  another  is  known 
to  be  detrimental  to  society  itself.  One  reason  why  the 
functions  of  the  state  are  increased  is  that  the  convic- 
tion prevails  that  society  must  do  more  for  the  general 
welfare.  That  what  belongs  to  the  public  should  be 
done  by  the  public  is  a  growing  sentiment.  The  social- 
izing trend  is  seen  in  the  tendency  toward  mutualism, 
partnei'ship,  co-operation,  conciliation,  arbitration,  in  the 
industries,  instead  of  wild  competition  in  which  might 
makes  riglit,  and  instead  of  an  antagonism  which  threat- 
ens society,  and  of  an  anarchy  which  endangers  the 
authority  of  the  law  and  the  existence  of  the  state. 
The  trend  toward  solidarity  is  also  seen  in  international 
affairs,  as  in  the  movement  toward  arbitration,  in  form- 
ing alliances  among  nations,  and  in  the  Concert  of 
Powers.! 

'  Is  there  not  in  nations  a  trend  toward  combination,  just  as  in  the 
industries  ?     The   Triple    Alliance  and    the  Concert   of  the    European 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       313 

Eternal  peace  between  nations  may  for  a  long  time 
be  a  dream,  and  an  alliance  which  shall  include  all 
peoples  may  be  the  hope  of  only  a  few  now ;  but  these 
few  may  stand  on  summits  where  fall  the  morning's  first 
rays  which  usher  in  the  new  day.  Truth  and  right  and 
goodness  and  the  beauty  of  harmony  point  in  that  direc- 
tion. It  is  the  prophecy  which  lies  concealed  in  Soci- 
ology. The  fact  that  there  is  a  strong  trend  toward  an 
equalization  which  places  the  elements  of  our  common 
humanity  above  the  fiction  of  rank  attained  simply  by 
birth,  is  significant. 

The  filling  up  of  this  meagre  outline  must  be  left 
to  the  student.  He  can  trace  more  fully  the  develop- 
ment and  interaction  of  the  social  energies  wliich  have 
been  mentioned.  Ages  are  not  so  much  distinguished 
by  the  absence  or  presence  of  social  forces  as  by  the 
relations  the  forces  sustain  to  one  another.  Two  ages 
may  contain  the  same  forces,  yet  one  be  controlled  by 
religious  interests,  the  other  by  industries,  and  there- 
fore show  marked  differences  ;  or  in  both  the  indus- 
tries may  be  dominant,  yet  in  different  degrees.  No 
investigator  questions  that  relatively  religion  now  absorbs 

Powers  seem  iudicative  of  that  trend.  The  solidarity  of  interests  among 
nations  is  likely  to  lead  to  international  co-operation.  No  one  familiar 
with  national  action  questions  that  such  action,  no  less  than  that  of 
individuals  and  voluntary  associations,  is  largely  controlled  by  selfish 
interests.  But  nations  are  more  guarded ;  diplomacy  may  be  the  art 
of  so  using  words  as  to  hide  the  real  meaning.  By  the  interaction  of 
nations  the  interests  held  in  common  will  receive  more  attention.  The 
conditions  and  movements  of  the  times  now  more  than  ever  promote 
internationalism.  There  are  indications  that  we  are  on  the  eve  of  great 
national  conflicts ;  but  they  are  likely  to  be  but  means  for  greater  unity 
among  nations.  The  organic  relation  of  nations  is  becoming  more  evi- 
dent, just  as  the  social  organism  of  humanity.  Certainly  at  no  former 
period  did  the  conditions  for  general  j)rogress  seem  so  favorable  as  at 
present.  But  there  are  also  powerful  deteriorating  and  destructive  ten- 
dencies which  must  be  studied  in  forming  an  estimate  of  the  age. 


814     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

less  attention  than  during  the  Middle  Ages,  the  Refor- 
mation, and  later  periods.  Yet  it  may  be  that  this  does 
not  indicate  an  actual  loss  of  religious  power.  Perhaps 
religion  has  not  lost,  but  the  industries  have  gained, 
and  that  makes  the  change  in  relative  prominence. 
Trinity  Church,  New  York,  need  not  lose  a  particle, 
and  yet  the  attention  may  be  so  concentrated  on  Wall 
Street  and  on  the  tide  of  humanity  sweeping  along 
Broadway  that  nothing  but  the  clock  of  the  church  is 
looked  at ;  and  the  business  blocks  may  so  overtower 
the  steeple  that  the  church,  once  a  most  conspicuous 
landmark,  is  hardly  visible.  The  church  is  the  same, 
the  surroundings  are  changed. 

The  account  of  the  social  forces  of  the  age  here  given  is  the 
result  of  decades  of  special  study  in  America  and  Europe.  Differ- 
ent views  on  so  extensive  a  subject  will  naturally  prevail.  The  most 
conflicting  opinions  are  found  even  among  scholars.  Few  try  to 
get  a  philosophy  of  the  age,  being  content  with  the  facts  given  by 
the  papers  rather  than  intent  on  passing  from  them  to  principles. 
A  local  study  of  the  social  forces  in  one's  environment  or  state 
may  yield  results  different  from  those  obtained  when  the  study  is 
extended  both  to  Europe  and  America. 

In  the  preceding  pages  tlie  emphasis  has  been  placed  on  promi- 
nent and  dominant  tendencies.  Many  a  heart  and  many  a  region 
may  promote  other  tendencies  without  interfering  with  the 
correctness  of  the  statements  given. 

The  social  forces  of  the  day  must  be  judged  according  to  the 
influences  under  which  they  act.  Forces  active  in  humanity  from 
the  first  have  been  unusually  developed  because  stimulated  and 
exercised  under  peculiar  circumstances.  The  factory,  the  use  of 
steam  and  electricity,  machinery,  have  exerted  a  dominant  influence. 
The  faculties  have  grown  in  the  line  in  which  they  were  cultivated; 
the  taste,  the  purpose,  have  grown  in  the  same  dii-ection.  The 
ease  of  production  has  absorbed  attention  in  production.  Add  to 
this  the  increased  appreciation  and  study  of  nature,  and  the  trend 
indicated  by  realism,  industrialism,  capitalism,  economics,  materi- 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL   STUDY   OF  THE  AGE.       315 

alism,  coiiimercialisni,  competition,  is  easily  understood.  What  is 
intended  as  the  means  of  life  is  made  the  end. 

As  the  study  of  the  age  is  largely  that  of  the  relative  dominance 
of  social  forces,  so  the  changes  to  be  made  will  be  in  respect  to 
this  dominance.  "We  must  have  bread;  but  that  does  not  mean 
that  it  is  life's  essence.  In  future  progress  not  an  iota  of  any  real 
value  gained  in  the  past  is  to  be  dropped.  The  sociological  student 
by  his  study  of  the  social  totality,  and  of  the  harmonious  relation 
of  its  various  forces,  is  saved  from  the  popular  movement  of  a 
reaction  against  an  extreme  toward  another  extreme.  The  problem 
of  progress  for  him  is  the  right  proportion  of  the  social  forces. 
The  higher  interests  must  be  made  supreme ;  and  the  value  of  the 
industries  consists  in  making  them  the  foundation  on  which  life 
builds. 

Much  of  the  eflBciency  of  the  social  forces  depends  on  the 
nature  of  their  organization.  Education  and  the  intellectual 
forces  generally  are  best  organized  in  Germany.  The  schools  are 
state  institutions  under  the  control  of  a  cabinet  minister  (Cultus- 
Minister) ;  education  in  the  common  schools  is  compulsory;  for  the 
learned  professions,  a  regular  course  in  the  gymnasia  and  univer- 
sities is  required  by  the  state ;  scholars  form  a  distinct  rank  or 
class  (Gelehrteiistand).  The  unity  of  oi'ganization  in  the  schools 
and  among  scholars  gives  scholarship  a  prominence  and  power 
there  as  found  nowhere  else.  Each  university  is  a  great  learned 
corporation ;  all  universities  are  intimately  connected  with  one 
another,  with  the  gymnasia  of  the  land,  with  the  learned  pro- 
fessions, and  with  intellectual  movements  generally.  This  soli- 
darity promotes  scholarly  independence,  freedom  of  thought,  and 
concentrated  power  respecting  the  other  forces  and  tendencies  of 
the  country. 

The  same  country  has  a  powerful  social  democracy  with  an 
organization  of  great  compactness.  Not  only  is  its  influence  felt 
among  laborers,  but  also  by  capitalists  and  the  church.  It  is  a 
political  as  well  as  industrial  organization,  and  takes  a  prominent 
part  in  national  affairs. 

In  religion  the  influence  of  organization  is  seen  in  the  difference 
between  state  and  free  churches,  also  in  the  unity  of  Catholicism 
and  the  divisions  in  Protestantism. 

The  different  ages  in  a  community  are  important  factors.  It 
has  been  claimed,  for  instance,  that  it  takes  three  generations,  as 


316     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

a  rule,  to  gain  the  ascendency  for  a  new  view.  Those  who  are  in 
mature  life  or  aged  when  the  view  is  announced,  are  too  much 
controlled  by  conservatism  and  traditionalism  to  be  won  by  it. 
The  young,  however,  are  more  easily  influenced ;  they  accept  it, 
or  some  of  them  do,  teach  it  to  their  children,  and  the  children 
develop  it  and  impart  it,  and  thus  it  gains  the  victory. 

While  the  future  is  so  much  in  the  hands  of  the  young,  for  the 
dominant  influence  of  the  age  itself  we  must  look  chiefly  to  those 
between  the  ages  of  '25  and  70.  In  infancy  children  are  totally 
dependent  on  others  and  occupy  the  time  of  older  persons.  From 
infancy  till  twelve  or  fourteen  they  are  still  dependent  in  part. 
Whether  they  enter  business  or  a  profession,  few  gain  ah  independ- 
ent place  or  maturity  of  judgment  before  25  which  enables  them 
to  make  themselves  felt  in  the  community ;  many  have  to  wait 
longer.  Perhaps  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  strongest  influence  is 
exerted  from  30  to  60,  though  the  influence  of  some  begins  earlier 
and  that  of  some  lasts  longer.  The  strength  of  a  nation  certainly 
lies  in  those  above  20  and  imder  70. 

The  United  States  Census  for  1890  gives  the  ages  of  the  popu- 
lation of  28  cities  with  100,000  inhabitants  and  upward.  Their 
total  population  was  9,697,900,  of  whom  4,850,653  were  males, 
4,847,307  females ;  227,391  were  under  one  year;  1,059,637  under 
five  years;  2,904,118  under  fifteen;  5,199,410  from  fifteen  to  forty- 
five  ;  1,280,547  from  forty-five  to  sixty-five ;  285,368  sixty-five  and 
over;  and  28,517  unknown.  This  shows  that  about  two-thirds  of 
the  population  are  between  the  ages  of  fifteen  and  sixty-five. 

Statistics  and  estimates  made  in  Europe  place  over  one-half  of 
the  total  population  of  the  advanced  nations  between  the  ages  of 
twenty  and  sixty,  and  over  40  per  cent  between  twenty  and  fifty.^ 

In  our  study  of  the  age  certain  factors  must  be  reckoned  with 
which  are  either  new  or  modifications  of  older  ones.  Their  influ- 
ence should  be  considered  in  estimating  the  probable  progress  in 
the  future. 

Sociology  as  a  new  element  has  already  been  mentioned. 
Sociological  studies  are  permeating  aU  departments  of  literature 
and  affecting  all  the  relations  of  life.  No  prediction  of  the  prob- 
able changes  can  be  made,  but  they  can  hardly  be  short  of  a  revo- 
lution. Individuals  and  associations  will  be  viewed  as  in  vital 
connection  with  the  great  social  organism,  thus  doing  away  with 
that  false  isolation  which  is  now  so  common. 

1  SchiifDe,  "  IJaii  niid  Leheu,"  iii.,  59. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       317 

Running  parallel  with  this  development  of  sociological  thought 
we  find  a  growing  discontent  of  the  masses,  the  uprising  of  labor, 
socialism  and  communism,  anarchism  and  nihilism,  all  evidences 
of  a  deep  social  ferment  intent  on  radical  changes.  The  theoretical 
and  practical  movements  unite  in  making  ours  an  age  of  social 
crises  and  revolutions. 

As  a  phase  in  the  marvellous  development  of  modern  industries 
with  their  division  of  labor  we  note  the  remarkable  growth  of  cities. 
The  improvement  in  agriculture  has  made  manual  labor  on  farms 
less  indispensable,  and  the  development  of  manufacture  and  com- 
merce has  more  and  more  concentrated  population  in  the  cities. 
This  process  is  seen  throughout  Europe  and  America.  In  the 
United  States  3.35  per  cent  of  the  inhabitants  were  in  cities  of 
4,000  inhabitants  and  upward  in  1790 ;  but  in  1890  there  were 
29.20.  The  significance  of  this  fact  will  be  appreciated  when  we 
consider  the  effect  of  massing  men  in  large  bodies,  the  increase 
of  association  by  this  process,  and  the  powerful  influence  always 
exerted  by  large  cities  in  social  movements.^ 

The  male  and  female  population  in  the  different  nations  and 
the  world  is  nearly  equal ;  but  in  many  places  woman's  influence 
is  confined  chiefly  to  the  family.  Throughout  the  civilized  world, 
however,  woman  is  coming  to  the  front,  and  exercises  new  and 
greater  social  power.  This  is  evident  in  education,  in  the  pro- 
fessions, in  business,  in  politics,  and  in  all  the  social  relations. 

Other  new^  or  more  emphasized  factors  can  only  be  mentioned. 
The  one-sided  dominance  of  natural  science  seems  to  be  at  an  end  ; 
on  the  passion  for  nature  rises  the  passion  for  humanity.  But  the 
absorbing  study  of  nature  and  the  wonderful  achievements  of 
natural  science  have  produced  effects  which  are  likely  to  be  per- 
manent. Whatever  ideals  niay  enchant  the  human  heart,  for 
this  earthly  life  success  will  depend  largely  on  subduing  and  using 
the  objects  and  forces  of  nature.    As  humanity  realizes  its  distinct- 

1  Mulhall  ("Industries  ami  Wealth  of  Nations,"  16-17)  says  that  in  Europe, 
the  United  States,  and  the  British  Colonies,  "  cities  (over  50,000  souls)  show 
an  increase  of  470  per  cent  in  60  years,  while  the  population  outside  them  has 
risen  only  70  per  cent,  the  former  growing  6  J  times  faster  than  the  latter.  .  .  . 
Rural  population  constitutes  in  the  United  Kingdom  45,  on  the  European  Con- 
tinent 82,  and  in  the  United  States  72,  per  cent  of  the  total."  "One-half  of 
the  world  is  engaged  in  agricultural  pursuits,  one-fourth  in  manufactures,  one- 
tenth  in  trade  and  transport,  and  the  remainder  (15  per  cent)  in  professions, 
public  service,  and  other  useful  occupations  "  (19). 


318     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

ness,  it  will,  however,  protest  against  so  naturalizing  man  as  to 
make  him  subject  to  nature ;  it  will  insist  on  humanizing  nature 
in  order  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  human  head  and  heart.  The 
value  of  the  environment  will  not  be  lost  sight  of  again  ;  but  it 
will  be  adapted  to  man,  not  man  enslaved  by  its  conditions.  The 
close  relation  of  mind  to  body  will  not  be  forgotten,  though  physi- 
ology will  not  be  substituted  for  psychology.  In  general,  the  trend 
will  be  from  abstractions  to  concrete  reality,  without  forgetting  the 
function  of  reason,  the  value  of  principles,  and  the  importance  of 
laws  and  systems.  This  simply  means  that  the  lessons  learned  from 
the  mai-vellous  progress  of  the  nineteenth  ceutmy  will  henceforth  be 
integral  parts  of  the  social  forces.  One-sided  movements  will  be 
overcome  in  the  course  of  progress,  such  as  the  extremes  of  conserva- 
tism and  of  radicalism,  and  the  false  views  of  individualism  and 
socialism  in  economics  and  politics;  the  consciousness  of  self,  being 
recovered,  will  determine  man's  place  in  nature ;  and  the  irrepressi- 
ble needs  of  the  human  heart  and  life  must  promote  a  more  har- 
monious co-operation  of  intellect,  susceptibility,  and  will,  in  place 
of  the  cold  intellectualism  which  tries  to  rationalize  what  requires 
to  be  experienced  and  practised. 

Among  the  newer  and  most  potent  social  forces  of  the  times  we 
put  the  United  States.  European  as  well  as  American  scholars  are 
tempted  to  indulge  in  predictions  as  they  contemplate  this  rising 
nation.  What  new  type  of  Anglo-Saxon  civilization  will  the  New 
World  develop  ?  Will  it  be  Anglo-Saxon,  or  will  foreign  admixture 
make  it  an  un classifiable  conglomeration?  These  and  numerous 
questions  of  nationality  and  literature  and  life  we  cannot  discuss. 
To  one  important  point,  often  overlooked,  attention  is  here 
directed :  the  effect  of  the  position  of  the  United  States  on  the 
social  power  of  the  nation. 

Their  very  location  determines  the  intimate  relation  of  European 
powers.  Even  Russia  is  afraid  of  being  overwhelmed  by  tlie 
thought  and  life  of  the  civilization  of  Western  Europe,  and  the 
isolation  of  the  Turk  is  due  to  his  religion  and  the  fact  that  he  is 
Asiatic  rather  than  European.  When  any  power  gains  an  eco- 
nomic advantage,  others  at  once  seek  to  rival  the  same.  The  powers 
watch  one  another  with  respect  to  education,  politics,  and  military 
aifairs,  and  each  country  carefully  studies  and  weighs  the  diplo- 
macy, the  press,  and  the  general  trend  of  the  others.  Thus  each 
nation  in  its  action  considers  the  rest.     There  is  therefore  a  certain 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE,       319 

European  internationalism.  As  for  many  ages  the  world's  culture 
and  progress  have  been  so  largely  concentrated  in  Europe,  the  same 
concentration  is  taken  for  granted  respecting  the  future.  America 
is  studied  with  interest,  but  chiefly  in  its  industrial  movements,  in 
the  development  of  its  vast  resources,  and  the  relation  of  the 
government  to  economic  affairs.  European  scholars  in  particular 
have  other  interests  in  America ;  but  in  general  its  importance  is 
supposed  to  consist  in  the  fact  that  it  affords  a  market  for  buying 
or  selling  agricultural  products,  manufactures,  and  stocks.  The 
outside  of  the  new  university  of  Vienna  is  ornamented  with  the 
portraits  of  eminent  scholars  from  all  countries  and  ages.  There 
is  but  one  portrait  of  an  American,  and  he  belongs  to  the  begin- 
ning of  our  national  history :  Benjamin  Franklin.  Thousands  of 
Americans  go  abroad  to  absorb  European  culture ;  but  what  is 
America  doing  for  the  social  progress  of  the  world  V 

The  question  does  not  affect  the  culture  at  home,  but  only  its 
influence  abroad  and  on  the  whole  of  humanity.  A  young  nation 
may  have  to  concentrate  its  energies  on  the  development  of  its 
resources  in  order  to  get  a  firm  basis  for  the  future  ;  but  the  time 
will  also  come  when  it  must  consider  its  place  in  the  total  social 
organism  and  its  influence  on  other  nations.  Our  very  isolation 
and  independence  may  interfere  with  the  exertion  of  powder  over 
other  people.  How  far  have  we  developed  a  characteristic  Ameri- 
can literature  which  has  become  a  world  power  ?  In  what  depart- 
ments of  scholarship  are  we  the  leaders  among  the  nations?  To 
which  of  our  schools  do  Europeans  flock  as  the  deepest  fountains  of 
wisdom  ?  Have  the  unrivalled  agricultural  and  industrial  resources 
culminated  in  advancing  to  the  pinnacle  of  modern  culture  all  the 
highest  interests  of  humanity?  Do  even  Canada,  Mexico,  and 
South  America  sit  at  our  feet  to  learn  science  and  philosophy, 
literature  and  art,  morals  and  religion,  or  do  they  look  rather  to 
distant  Europe  for  the  best  models  and  most  eminent  teachers  in 
these  departments? 

We  cannot  discuss  these  questions  of  such  moment  to  sociologi- 
cal students,  but  present  them  for  consideration.  The  answers  are 
by  no  means  always  easy.  But  they  are  problems  which  naturally 
arise  in  the  sociological  study  of  the  age,  and  come  with  special  force 
to  the  American  sociologist.^ 

1  America  affords  remarkable  advantages  for  sociological  research.    Good 

suggestions  on  this  subject  are  given  in  the  preface  of  "  Ancient  Society,"  by 


320     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

The  European  comiilications  are  bewildering.  Will  England  be 
able  to  maintain  its  industrial  and  commercial  supremacy,  and  to 
hold  its  foreign  possessions?  There  is  no  evidence  of  a  decrease 
of  the  military  armaments  of  the  Continental  nations,  in  spite  of 
the  crushing  debts  under  which  the  people  groan,  llussia,  with 
its  marvellous  growth  iu  power  and  influence,  is  a  problem  for 
Europe  and  perhaps  still  more  for  Asia.  Neither  in  Europe  nor 
in  Asia  has  that  country  an  outlet  to  the  south,  but  it  seeks  one 
to  the  Mediterranean  and  the  Persian  Gulf.  The  Turk,  who  has 
long  been  thought  sick  enough  to  die,  could  easily  be  disposed  of 
if  it  were  decided  what  to  do  with  the  country.  Kussia,  ever  since 
the  testament  of  Peter  the  Great,  has  been  eager  to  get  Constanti- 
noi)le;  but  the  enormous  advantage  thus  given  would  meet  with 
the  opposition  of  the  other  European  powers,  France  perhaps  ex- 
cepted. It  is  an  interesting  question  for  Europe  and  Asia  and,  in 
fact,  the  world,  what  civilization  will  be  developed  in  that  vast 
empire,  which  includes  one-seventh  of  the  territorial  surface  of  the 
globe,  —  namely,  one-half  of  Euroi)e  and  one-third  of  Asia. 

In  the  importance  of  Europe  and  America  for  a  knowledge  of 
the  age,  the  other  peoples  must  not  be  overlooked.  European  in- 
fluence is  rapidly  extending  in  Africa,  as  the  following,  from  "  The 
Library  Atlas  of  Modern  Geography,"  shows.  The  possessions  in 
Africa  are :  — 

Square  Miles.  luliabitauts. 

Great  Britain      ....  341,859  4,963,060 

Portugal 916,100  11,781,970 

France        250,000  5,275,770 

Spain 13  5,086 

Germany 833,000  5,110,000 

Italy 316,100  5,658,000 

Lewis  H.  Morfjan.  American  s)ipcialists  on  Indian  antiquities  complain  of  the 
difficulty  of  excitinj;  an  interest  in  the  United  States  in  their  accumulation  and 
preservation.  European  etlniolo^ists  maTiifest  a  deep  interest  in  the  subject,  and 
some  of  tiie  best  researches  are  made  by  them.  The  antiquities  of  Egypt  have 
enriched  European  museums  ;  and  witli  an  apathy  like  that  of  modern  Egypt, 
Americans  let  many  of  the  treasures  of  America's  rich  past  wander  to  Europe, 
leaving  it  to  others  to  appreciate  what  sliould  be  most  prized  at  liome.  Not 
even  the  hand  of  vandalism  is  stayed  in  destroying  the  relics  of  buried  tribes  and 
old  civilizations ! 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  some  day  sociologists  will  learn  to  appreciate  Washington 
as  a  centre  for  sociological  investigation,  on  account  of  its  Smithsonian  and  otlier 
collections,  its  government  institutions,  and  its  representatives  from  different 
nations. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       321 

Whatever  influence  these  nations  may  exert  in  the  way  of  poli- 
tical organization,  industrial  development,  education,  and  religion, 
the  climate  and  general  sanitary  conditions  of  a  large  part  of  the 
continent  are  not  favorable  to  extensive  and  permanent  settlement 
by  the  white  race.  Africa,  while  developed  largely  under  Euro- 
pean influence,  will  no  doubt  continue  to  belong  to  the  Africans. 
As  civilization  increases  they  may  become  more  independent  of 
foreign  influence.  Before  the  supremacy  of  European  influence  is 
secure,  many  conflicts  with  the  different  peoples  and  with  Moham- 
medan fanaticism  may  be  necessary. 

It  is  idle  to  speculate  on  the  changes  likely  to  take  place  in  Asia 
•with  more  than  one-half  of  the  population  of  the  w'orld.  Other 
factors  in  the  near  future  may  become  more  important  than  the 
struggle  between  England  and  Russia  for  the  supremacy.  Ger- 
many, France,  and  other  European  nations  may  become  factors  in 
the  struggle.  More  significant,  how^ever,  may  be  the  development 
of  the  Asiatics  themselves.  The  rapid  advances  of  Japan  with  its 
forty  million  inhabitants  must  be  reckoned  with.  The  Chinese 
Empire  contains  a  population  of  four  hundred  millions.  The  ex- 
clusivism  which  prevails  limits  foreign  influence.  The  people  are 
industrious,  their  standard  of  living  enables  them  to  underbid  the 
European  in  the  labor  market,  and  their  effect  on  the  industries 
is  keenly  felt  in  the  numerous  countries  to  which  they  emigrate. 
China  wiU  probably  continue  to  belong  to  the  Chiiaese ;  and  if  the 
military  spirit  of  the  people  is  aroused,  all  the  calculations  of  Euro- 
pean supremacy  in  Asia  may  be  at  an  end. 

What  will  become  of  India,  with  some  three  hundred  million  in- 
habitants ?  Can  a  foreign  ruler  maintain  himself  after  the  people 
grow  in  consciousness  of  power  and  become  better  able  to  govern 
themselves  ? 

The  very  civilization  introduced  by  Europe  will  tend  to  promote 
the  independence  of  the  Asiatic  nations.  The  Europeans  would 
not  be  apt  to  exterminate  the  natives  if  they  could,  nor  can  they 
hope  to  gain  the  perpetual  dominance  over  them  by  means  of  colo- 
nization. Whatever  outside  influence,  therefore,  may  be  exerted, 
there  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  Asia  will  remain  Asiatic,  as  Africa 
will  continue  to  be  African. ^ 

This  changes  materially  the  aspect  from  that  which  considers 

1  Statistics  of  population  make  doubtful  even  the  continued  supremacy  of 
the  white  race  in  South  America. 

21 


322     INTRODUCTION  TV  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

only  the  most  advanced  nations  and  takes  their  world-supremacy 
as  a  matter  of  coui'se.  Interesting  discussions  of  the  subject  are 
found  in  "  National  Life  and  Character,"  by  C.  H.  Pearson.  Many 
of  the  forecasts  are  far  from  encom-aging.  "  The  day  will  come, 
and  perhaps  is  not  far  distant,  when  the  European  observer  will 
look  round  to  see  the  globe  girdled  with  a  continuous  zone  of  the 
black  and  yellow  races,  no  longer  too  weak  for  aggression  or 
under  tutelage,  but  independent,  or  practically  so,  in  government, 
monopolizing  the  trade  of  their  own  regions,  and  circumscribing 
the  industry  of  the  European  ;  when  Chinamen  and  the  nations  of 
Hindostan,  the  States  of  Central  and  South  America,  by  that 
time  predominantly  Indian,  and,  it  may  be,  African  nations  of  the 
Congo  and  the  Zambesi,  under  a  dominant  caste  of  foreign  rulers, 
are  represented  by  fleets  in  the  European  seas,  invited  to  inter- 
national conferences,  and  welcomed  as  allies  in  the  quarrels  of  the 
civilized  world.  The  citizens  of  these  countries  will  then  be  taken 
up  into  the  social  relations  of  the  white  races,  will  throng  the 
English  turf,  or  the  salons  of  Paris,  and  will  be  admitted  to 
marriage"  (84-85). 

So  far  as  the  enlightenment  of  the  advanced  nations  is  con- 
cerned it  is  almost  universally  overestimated.  To  them  is  falsely 
attributed  the  science,  the  learning,  and  the  culture  of  the  very 
few  who  are  on  the  summit.  Those  who  study  the  actual  condi- 
tion of  the  most  civilized  nations  are  appalled  at  the  fearful  reign 
of  barbarism  and  heathenism.  Amid  great  industrial  and  intel- 
lectual development,  it  has  been  claimed  that  there  is  an  actual 
loss  of  moral  power.  As  the  savage  is  intent  on  eating  and  drink- 
ing and  pleasure,  so  amid  material  interests  we  see  the  survival  of 
the  savage  in  the  life  absorbed  by  gratification,  but  regardless  of 
the  higher  purposes  of  life.  We  have  no  complete  statistics  of  the 
oft-repeated  decadence  of  the  most  advanced  nations.  In  many 
instances  there  is  decay  at  the  top.  Some  of  the  aristocratic 
families  are  dying  out,  in  many  others  there  are  but  few  descend- 
ants. The  laborers  usually  have  larger  families,  and  in  the  lower 
races  the  increase  of  population  is  often  rapid.  Tliere  can  be  no 
doubt  that  in  Europe  and  America  great  deterioration  results  from 
luxury,  from  vice,  from  alcoholism,  and  from  the  hardships  and 
the  low  standard  of  life  among  the  poorer  classes.^    But  in  con- 

1  "  The  Decline  of  the  Family  "  and  "  The  Decay  of  Character  "  are  the 
closing  chapters  in  Mr.  Pearson's  work. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF   THE  AGE.       323 

nection  with  these  destructive  factors  the  remedial  agencies,  never 
before  so  general  and  constantly  increasing,  must  be  considered. 

In  connection  with  the  study  of  the  age  a  practical  plan  for 
studying  a  community  is  added.  This  plan  will  afford  an  oppor- 
tunity for  the  application  of  many  principles  given  in  the  preced- 
ing chapters.  For  a  beginning  it  may  be  advisable  to  take  a 
community  smaller  than  a  state  or  large  city.  However  circum- 
scribed the  sphere,  the  study  ought  to  be  made  a  model  for  an  in- 
vestigation of  all  communities,  whether  lai'ge  or  small.  Such  a 
scheme  as  that  presented  is  specially  valuable  as  a  guide  for 
original  investigations  and  is  adapted  to  Seminar  work.  Each 
member  of  the  class  can  investigate  a  particular  department  of  the 
commimity  and  present  the  results  to  the  whole  class  for  discussion. 
The  plan  ought  to  be  a  discipline  in  the  method  of  original  re- 
search, and  each  student  should  give  a  full  account  of  his  method 
of  procedure. 

Numerous  other  subjects  can  be  chosen  for  similar  class  exer- 
cises. A  sociological  work  can  be  selected  for  discussion ;  the 
social  forces  of  a  particular  time  or  a  particular  people  can  be  inves- 
tigated ;  a  study  of  institutions  is  very  important ;  in  the  present 
age  the  general  social  character,  the  social  trend,  the  relative  domi- 
nance of  particular  social  forces,  the  social  movements  in  different 
nations,  the  uprising  of  the  masses,  the  social  problem,  socialism, 
and  many  other  subjects  are  admirably  adapted  for  special  inquiry. 
Of  such  importance  to  the  student  is  a  knowledge  of  the  age  in 
which  he  lives  that  it  may  be  best  to  take  subjects  from  the  times, 
considering  them  in  connection  with  their  genesis  and  also  in  the 
light  of  future  progress. 


Plan  for  the  Study  of  a  Community. 

First  make  the  community  to  be  studied  as  definite 
as  possible.  Whether  it  be  a  village  or  city,  a  township 
or  county,  let  the  boundary  be  so  exact  that  there  can  be 
no  mistake  respecting  the  limits  of  the  investigation. 

After  determining  the  sphere  of  the  investigation,  fix 
the  aim  of  the  inquiry.     What  is  to  be  the  result  of  the 


3-24i     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

study  ?  The  aim  is  so  impurluiit  because  on  it  depends 
the  nature  of  the  inquiry  and  of  the  results. 

The  objective  reality  is  to  be  mastered.  The  scien- 
tific method  should  be  adopted  so  far  as  possible. 
Statistics  should  be  gathered  whenever  attainable.  A 
definite  method  should  be  adopted  for  every  department 
of  the  inquiry. 

After  settling  the  preliminaries  investigate  — 

1.  The  Natur'al  JEyivironment  of  the  Commwiity. 
This  includes  all  the  natural  conditions,  such  as  the 

longitude  and  latitude,  the  face  of  the  country  whether 
a  valley  or  hilly,  the  character  of  the  soil,  the  minerals, 
the  flora  and  fauna,  the  climate,  the  hydrographic  con- 
ditions. After  describing  the  natural  environment,  its 
effect  on  the  community  should  be  indicated,  on  the 
health,  on  the  industries,  on  recreation,  on  the  life  and 
views  of  the  people  in  general. 

2.  The  History  of  the  Community. 

Origin  of  the  Community.  The  process  of  develop- 
ment. Epochs,  Dominant  factors  at  different  periods, 
influential  persons,  significant  events.  Emphasis  should 
be  placed  on  what  is  characteristic  and  typical.  What 
permanent  forces  have  prevailed  throughout  the  history  ? 
Growth  of  Institutions.  Show  the  effect  of  the  history 
on  the  present  condition  of  the  community,  —  on  tradi- 
tions, manners,  customs,  and  the  general  character. 
Folk  lore. 

We  now  pass  to  the  study  of  the  community  itself. 

3.  Racial  and  National  Distinctions. 

Indians,  Caucasians,  Africans,  Mongolians.  Natives, 
their  ancestry.  Were  their  parents  natives  or  of  foreign 
birth  ?  Foreigners,  their  nationalities  and  social  forces. 
The  influence  of  race  and  nationality  on  the  population, 
on  the  industrial,  political,  social,  moral,  and  religious 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.       825 

situation.  Advantages  and  disadvantages  of  the  mix- 
ture of  different  races  and  nationalities.  Processes  of 
assimilation.     Should  immigration  be  restricted  ? 

4.  The  Family  Life. 

Views  respecting  the  family.  Divorce.  Number  of 
families.  Size  of  families.  Family  life.  Number  of 
married  and  single  men  and  women.  Causes  of  the 
surplus  of  men  or  of  women  in  a  place.  The  relation  of 
the  sexes.  The  position  of  woman,  social,  industrial, 
legal,  intellectual.     Description  of  the  homes. 

5.  Ages  in  the  Population. 

Rate  of  birth  and  death.  Other  causes  affecting  age 
—  emigration  and  immigration.  Number  of  children 
under  five ;  between  five  and  fifteen ;  number  of  persons 
between  fifteen  and  twenty  ;  between  twenty  and  sixty ; 
over  sixty.  Deaths  by  accident ;  suicide ;  diseases 
among  children  ;  consumption  and  other  diseases.  Gen- 
eral sanitary  condition.  The  differences  in  age  as  affect- 
ing the  character  of  the  community. 

6.  Social  Groups,  Unorganized. 

These  include  the  natural,  spontaneous  social  distinc- 
tions of  a  community  which  divide  it  into  different 
classes.  These  groups  require  no  specific  organization 
to  make  them  distinct.  The  lines  are  usually  drawn 
definitely  between  the  higher,  the  middle,  and  lower 
classes.  Each  of  these  classes  may  again  be  subdivided, 
so  that  numerous  separate  groups  are  found  in  every 
general  class.  The  social  ranks  of  the  community  are 
to  be  studied.  Is  there  a  nobility  of  birth  ?  Is  there 
military  rank  ?  Who  constitute  the  aristocracy  ?  The 
reason  for  social  groupings  is  especially  important. 
Usually  the  bond  of  union  consists  in  what  men  prize 
most;  hence  the  appreciation  of  a  community  can  be 
studied   in   its   social    groups.      There    are    groupings 


326     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

according  to  family  (consanguinity),  or  according  to  the 
position  of  ancestors  (aristocracy  of  birth),  or  according 
to  wealth,  or  according  to  pursuits,  whether  intellectual, 
artistic,  or  economic.  It  should  be  studied  what  deter- 
mines the  friendship  of  men,  their  associations,  their 
social  gatherings.  The  character  and  conduct  of  the 
various  groups  should  be  investigated,  their  sentiments, 
the  customs  and  fashions  which  prevail,  the  traditions 
and  tendencies.  What  is  the  influence  of  these  groups 
on  the  members,  on  one  another,  and  on  the  community  ? 
Analyze  the  groups  in  order  to  determine  what  forces 
prevail  in  them.  The  aim  is  a  definite  view  of  the  social 
life  outside  of  the  regular  organizations. 

7.  The  Economic  Cotidition. 

Wealth  of  the  community.  Its  source.  Employments, 
agricultural,  industrial,  commercial,  professional.  Capi- 
talists, laborers,  servants,  drones.  Production,  distribu- 
tion, exchange,  consumption.  Means  of  communication. 
Different  kinds  of  manufacture,  kinds  of  merchandise 
sold.  Effect  of  the  economic  condition  on  the  character 
of  the  community.  Are  material  interests  dominant  ? 
Contrasts  in  the  economic  situation.  Relation  of  the 
classes  to  one  another.  Condition  of  manual  laborers. 
Does  the  sweating  system  prevail  ?  Do  women  and  chil- 
dren work  in  factories  ?  Hours  of  labor.  Treatment  of 
laborers.  Describe  the  manufacturing  and  business 
establishments. 

8.  The  Moral  Condition. 

Business  integrity  —  the  etliics  of  Trade.  The  social 
evil.  Intemperance.  Gambling.  Number  of  saloons. 
The  criminal  classes.  Causes  of  crime.  Statistics  of 
arrests  and  convictions.  Character  and  efficiency  of  the 
police.  Justice  in  the  courts.  The  relation  of  lawyers 
to  crime.  Treatment  of  pi-isoncrs.  Is  anything  done  for 
released  prisoners  ?     Various  efforts  at  reform. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  AGE.      327 

9.  The  Religious  Condition. 

The  denominations.  Their  relation  to  one  another. 
Churches.  Character  of  the  religious  services.  Statistics 
of  attendance  at  the  services.  Church  members,  pro- 
portion of  the  entire  population.  Infidelity  and  religious 
indifference.  The  churches  and  the  masses.  The  effect 
of  the  churches  on  the  moral,  social,  industrial,  and 
political  character  of  the  community.  Other  religious 
societies  than  churches. 

10.  The  Intellectual  Condition. 

The  Schools.  Character  of  the  education.  Is  educa- 
tion compulsory  ?  The  position  of  the  teachers.  Is 
there  co-operation  between  the  home  and  the  school  ? 
Do  many  students  attend  schools  away  from  home  ? 
Statistics  of  illiteracy  among  natives,  foreigners,  and  the 
different  classes.  Libraries  ;  character  of  the  literature 
read.  Lectures.  Journals.  Literary  and  scientific 
societies.  Intellectual  character  of  the  professions.  In- 
tellectual influence  of  the  professions.  Literary  men  and 
authors.  Is  there  a  history  of  the  community  ?  Are 
there  archives  for  valuable  documents  ? 

11.  Artistic  or  Esthetic  Interests. 

Development  of  taste.  Appreciation  and  cultivation 
of  the  beautiful  in  nature  and  art.  The  study  of  music. 
Sculpture  in  homes  and  in  public.  Painting,  draw- 
ing, photography.  Architecture.  Landscape  gardening. 
Parks.  Museums.  Concerts,  operas,  theatres.  Artists. 
Musicians.  Poets.  Societies  for  the  promotion  of  art. 
What  does  the  community  do  to  promote  aesthetic 
culture  ? 

12.  The  Political  Condition. 

Exact  nature  of  the  government  of  the  community. 
The  constitution  and  the  laws.  Officials  and  their  func- 
tions.    The  relation  of  the  community  to  the  state  and 


328     INTRODUCTION  TO  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY. 

nation.  What  is  left  to  the  individual,  and  what  is  con- 
trolled by  the  public  ?  Who  controls  the  gas  and  water 
works  and  the  street  railway  ?  Taxes.  Efficiency  and 
honesty  of  the  government.  The  saloon  in  politics. 
Political  parties.  Questions  at  issue.  Character  of  the 
elections. 

13.  Public  Institutions. 

Penal  and  charitable  institutions.  Prisons,  reforma- 
tories, asylums.  Theory  respecting  the  aim  of  punish- 
ment. Character  of  the  penal  institutions.  Provision  for 
paupers  and  the  defective  classes.  The  almshouse.  The 
insane  asylum,  A  study  of  the  physically  and  men- 
tally defective,  such  as  the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  the 
lame  and  diseased,  epileptics,  idiots,  etc.,  and  the  provi- 
sion made  for  them.  The  relation  of  public  to  private 
charity.     Efficiency  of  the  charities. 

14.  Volimtart/  Organizations. 

For  industrial,  political,  intellectual,  sestlietic,  recrea- 
tive, moral,  and  religious  purposes.  The  motives  which 
lead  to  organization.  What  social  forces  are  involved  in 
the  organizations  ?  Classify  the  organizations.  Masons. 
Odd  Fellows.  Labor  organizations.  Temperance  and 
other  reformatory  societies.  Combinations  of  capitalists. 
Religious  associations.  Indicate  the  cliaracter  and  effi- 
ciency of  the  various  organizations.  The  relation  of  the 
organizations  to  one  another  and  to  the  community. 
The  good  and  the  evil  in  the  organizations. 

15.  The  Community  as  an  Orgaiiism. 

What  unity  prevails  ?  What  is  held  in  common  ? 
The  public  interests.  Disintegrating  factors.  Antago- 
nisms. Conflicts.  Individualistic  and  communistic  tend- 
encies. Is  there  a  public  opinion  ?  If  so,  how  is  it 
formed,  how  expressed,  and  what  is  its  influence  ?  The 
exact  character  of  the  community  as  an  organism. 


THE  SOCIOLOGICAL  STUDY  OF   THE  AGE.       329 

16.    The  External  Relations  of  the  Community. 

What  bonds  unite  it  to  contiguous  communities  ?  The 
influences  it  exerts  on,  and  receives  from,  them.  De- 
pendence and  independence.  Show  the  exact  nature  of 
the  relation  to  the  environment,  whether  predominantly 
agricultural,  industrial,  political,  intellectual,  moral,  or 
religious.  The  place  of  the  community  as  an  organism 
in  organisms  is  to  be  determined.  From  its  immediate 
social  environment  we  consider  the  relation  of  the  com- 
munity to  the  state,  the  nation,  and  to  humanity.  Not 
being  isolated,  it  can  be  understood  only  in  its  organic 
connection  with  the  totality  to  wliicli  it  belongs.  Has 
the  community  a  representative  in  the  legislature  or  in 
congress  ?  How  is  it  affected  by  the  laws  of  the  state 
and  the  nation  ?  Has  it  direct  or  only  indirect  connec- 
tion with  foreign  countries  ? 

To  this  scheme  for  the  study  of  the  natural  environ- 
ment, the  character,  the  history,  and  the  relations  of  a 
community  can  be  added  an  inquiry  into  its  ethical 
needs,  in  order  to  promote  its  future  progress. 

REFLECTIONS. 

The  Age,  define  it.  Exact  Aim  of  the  Study.  Difference  be- 
tween Social  and  Sociological  Study.  Classification  of  Na- 
tions for  the  Study  of  Humanity.  "What  Nations  are  worthy 
of  Special  Inquiry  ?  Dominant  Forces.  Genesis  of  their 
Dominance.  Reactions.  Importance  of  the  Relative  Prom- 
inence of  Social  Forces  in  Different  Ages.  Power  of  Organ- 
ization of  Forces.  Effect  of  the  Differences  of  Age  in  a 
Community.  Forces  which  are  New  or  have  been  Changed, 
The  Social  Influence  of  the  United  States  as  affected  by 
Location.  Give  the  General  Outlines  of  the  Plan  for  the 
Study  of  a  Community. 


INDEX. 


Adaptation,  basis  of  association, 
157-159. 

Age,  The,  its  characteristics,  304-308, 
311,  312;  its  study,  179,  180;  lim- 
ited knowledge  of,  296,  297. 

Ages  in  a  community,  315,  316. 

Animal  organization,  59,  142. 

Aristotle,  how  used  in  Middle  Ages, 
39;  obscured  for  ages,  229;  phi- 
losophy of,  89 ;  politics,  13,  78,  86. 

Association  and  aggregation,  46,  117, 
137. 

Association,  classification  of,  187;  con- 
scious and  unconscious,  8,  9,  46,  47 ; 
distinct  from  sociation,  130;  kinds 
and  degrees,  137,  138;  not  as  its  in- 
dividuals, but  as  its  social  forces, 
125,  126;  primitive,  9;  reasons  for, 
157-160;  what  it  involves,  154-159. 

Associative  forces,  246,  247. 

Associative  impulses,  169-172. 

Augustine,  86. 


Bacon,    Lord,    formulated    law    for 

science,  20,  31,  257;   movement  of 

states,  183. 
Bacon,  Koger,  220. 
Bascom,  John,  definition  of  Sociology, 

110;  subjects  discussed  b}',  266. 
Bastian,  P.  W.  A.,  on  environment, 

227. 
Bentham,  22. 

Bernheim,  E.,  history,  93,  99. 
Biology  and  Sociology,  48,  59. 
Bossuet,  21. 


Bowne,  B.  P.,  269. 
Brande,  W.  T.,  on  matter,  288. 
Briuton,  D.  G.,  266. 
Buckle,  mistake  of,  227;  the  thinker 
and  the  observer,  261. 


Caird,  E.,  on  the  Positive  Philosophy, 
41. 

Carlyle  on  ideals,  210. 

Carpenter,  W.  B.,  on  matter,  288. 

Causes,  real  and  imaginarj',  189,  190. 

Characteristics,  American,  303;  Ger- 
man, 302,  303  ;  Russian,  302. 

Christianity,  15,  16. 

Christian  thought  and  the  science  of 
society,  18-20. 

Civilization  and  the  lower  races,  321, 
322. 

Civilization,  improvement  of,  232; 
wherein  distinguished  from  sav- 
agery, 11,  12. 

Clearness  and  distinctness,  73. 

Clement,  Epistles,  39. 

Cohn,  G.,  ethics,  225 ;  method,  263, 

Communism,  134. 

Community,  analysis  of,  323-329. 

Comte,  28-37;  on  ethical  factor  in 
Sociology,  205;  hierarchy  of  sci- 
ences, 32,  33,  147,  275;  Positive 
Philosophy,  67;  theological,  meta- 
physical, and  positive  stages,  29-31. 

Conscience,  individual  and  social,  231. 

Consciousness  of  kind,  159,  160. 

Conservatism  and  Radicalism,  192, 
193. 


332 


INDEX. 


Constructive  social  forces,  209,  210. 
Co-operation,   individual  and    social, 

152,  153. 
Copernicus,  181. 
Cosmopolitanism,  300. 
Crabbe  on  society,  52. 
Critical  meiliod,  Kant  and  Comte,  34, 

35,  274. 
Culture,  history  of,  28,  DO;  literature 

on  history  of,  92. 


Darwin  and  heredity,  227,  228. 

Darwin,  on  evolution,  60-tJ2;  on  na- 
ture and  law,  292;  on  practical 
application  of  science,  203. 

Decadence,  322. 

Deduction,  243. 

Descriptive  Sociology,  107. 

Design,  61. 

Differentiation,  process  of,  194-198. 

Dilthey,  W.,  263. 

Division,  a  mental  convenience,  105; 
benefit  of,  106 ;  completeness  of  so- 
ciological, 233-237;  how  found,  108; 
into  Static  and  D3'namic  Sociology, 
objections  to,  106,  107;  mental  ab- 
straction, 103,  104;  rules  for,  105. 

Dogmatism,  262,  280,  282,  283,  293. 

Draper,  J.  W.,  on  law,  292. 

Du  Bois-Reymond,  283. 

Duns  Scotus,  on  natural  and  super- 
natural, 20. 


Education,  individual  and  social, 
132. 

Emerson  on  society,  133. 

Encyclopedists,  35. 

Engels,  Friedrich,  emphasis  on  eco- 
nomics, 85. 

Environment,  limit  of  its  inliuence, 
226,  227. 

Equality,  law  of,  248,  249,  263. 

Ethical  Actuality,  The,  220,  221. 

]':thi(al  factors  in  Comte,  204,205. 

Ethical  Ideal,  The,  216-220. 


Ethics,  sociological,  aim  of,  207,  208, 
210-212,  216-219,  226;  importance, 
209;  justified,  202-207,  225,  226; 
distinguished  from  social,  208; 
science  and  art,  230,  231. 

European  complications,  320. 

European  iufiucuce  in  Africa,  320,  321. 

Evolution  of  homogeneity  into  heter- 
ogeneity, 193-198. 

Evolution,  sociological,  what  it  in- 
cludes, 166,  167. 


Eaikbanics,  Arthur,  43,  265,  266. 

Family,  The,  9-11,  50-52. 

Flint,  K.,  39,  40. 

Franklin,  B.,  319. 

Freedom  of  will  and  law,  18,  19,  65. 

Fulton,  Robert,  229. 


Gekmain,  Sophie,  31. 

Giddings,  F.  H.,  43,  263;  conscious- 
ness of  kind,  159,  160;  sociological 
ethics,  206,  207. 

Goethe,  181. 

Grotius  on  international  and  natural 
law,  22,  40. 

Gumplowicz,  69,  286. 


Haeckel,  Ernst,  on  Darwin,  62,  227. 

Haeckel's  monism,  289,  290. 

Haldane,  R.  D.,  198. 

Hamilton,  Sir  William,  on  method, 
257. 

Ilartmann,  E.  von,  170. 

Hebraism,  its  social  thought,  14,  234. 

Hegel,  89;  history,  174,  186;  philoso- 
phy, 278. 

Helmholfz,  203. 

Herbart  on  psychology,  63,  186. 

Heider,  the  history  of  humanity,  23- 
28,  41. 

Heredity,  164,  227,  228. 

Historical  and  rational  in(|uiry,  90,  91. 

History  and  biography,  121,  135. 


INDEX. 


333 


History,  its  aim,  88-89,  92;  its  early 
records,  13 ;  origin  of,  12,  Vi ;  reason 
in,  174;  social  thought  in,  2U9,  270. 

Hobbes,  22. 

Homer,  189. 

Humanism  of  Greece,  14. 

Humanity  as  a  society,  47-53,  121. 

Humboldt,  A.  von,  67. 

Hume,  287. 

Huxley  ou  materialism,  289. 

Hyslop,  J.  H,,  ou  method,  263. 


Ideal,  of  Progress,  means  for  realiza- 
tion, 221-225. 

Imagination  in  science,  34. 

Imitation,  169,  170. 

Independent  sociological  research, 
263-271. 

Individual  and  society,  7,  8,  37,  53,  54, 
116-126. 

Individualism  and  socialism,  130-132. 

Individuality  and  socialization,  133- 
134. 

Individuals,  distinction  between  iso- 
lated and  associated,  121-123;  not 
viewed  as  abstractions,  145,  146, 150. 

Induction,  242,  243,  259. 

Institutions,  177-179,  184, 185. 

Internationalism,  300,  312,  313,  318, 
319. 


Kant  on  human  development,  28,  41 ; 
on  ultimate  problems,  286. 

Kepler,  34. 

Kierkegaard,  representative  of  indi- 
vidualism, 153. 


Language,  95,  141. 

Lassalle,  F.,  iron  law  of  wages,  256. 

Law,  its  meaning,  257,  258;  origin  of, 
12,  257-259. 

Laws  in  humanity,  66,  284,  285. 

Lazarus,  Moritz,  psychology  of  na- 
tions, 10,  93,  94. 


Leibnitz,  influence  of,  22;  monads  of, 

152 ;  on  mental  energy,  64. 
Lewes,  G.  H.,  on  Comte,  31,  35,  36. 
Literature  on  Sociology,  39-43,   265- 

269. 
Littre,  41. 
Locke,    imitation,   170;    innate   ideas 

227.  ' 

Lotze,  "Microcosm,"  24,  186;  energy 

of  thought,   227;  materialism,  288; 

value,  168. 
Lubbock,  Sir  John,  266. 


Mackenzie,  J.  L.,  269. 

Maine,  H.  S.,  267. 

Malthus,  indebtedness  of  Darwin  to, 
62. 

Martensen,  socialism  and  individual- 
ism, 153. 

Martineau,  Harriet,  translation  of 
"Positive  Philosophy,"  41,265. 

Marx,  Karl,  economics,  85,  86. 

Materialism,  288,  289. 

Matter  unknowable,  286-289. 

Menger,  A.,  263. 

Metaphysics,  views  of  Comte  and 
Kant,  33,  34. 

Method,  a  priaii,  239,  240;  dependent 
upon  the  material,  244,  255 ;  in  So- 
ciology, literature  on,  263;  of  social 
evolution,  249,  250;  of  sociological 
ethics,  250-254;  of  Sociology,  239; 
of  Sociology,  difficulties,  258-260; 
sociological,  241,  255,  256,  257;  sta- 
tistical, 260,  261. 

Middle  Ages,  their  social  thought,  16, 
18-20,  39. 

Mill,  J.  S.,  on  happiness  as  life's  aim, 
216. 

Milton,  34. 

]\Iohl,  R.  von,  on  the  state,  51. 

Monism,  280-291. 

Montesquieu,  "  Spirit  of  Laws,"  21, 
40,  96. 

Morgan,  L.  H.,  266,  320. 

Muirland,  J.  H.,  317. 


334 


INDEX. 


Mulford,  E.,  a  nation  an  organism,  153. 
Mulhall,  M.G.,on  statistics,  317. 
Miiller,  F.,  on   classification  of  lan- 
guage, 113. 
MuUer,  Max,  language,  113,  266. 


Nationality,  development  of,  299, 

300. 
Need,  basis  of  Association,  157-159, 

168,  169. 
New  social  era,  312. 
New  social  factors,  316-318. 
Newton,  34,  252. 


Objective  realism,  304-307. 
Organizations,  when  effete,  222,  223. 
Orient,  its  social  thought,  14,  15. 
Original  research,  261,  263-271. 
dttingen,  A.  von,  261. 
Over-organization,  309,  310. 


Pearson,  Chas.  H.,  higher  and  lower 

races,  322;  motive  for  action,  230. 
People,  their  growth  in  prominence, 

17,  18. 
Philosophy,  Greek,  13-15. 
Plato,  the  state,  13;  philosophy  of,  39, 

89. 
Political  economy,  changes  in,  86,  87 ; 

its  place,  85-87;  its  prominence,  84, 

85;  literature  on,  87,  88. 
Population  of  the  globe,  297. 
Prevision  in  Sociology,  180-184,  198, 

199. 
Primitive  social  state,  165. 
Principles,  how  obtained,  244-249. 
Principles    of   society,    143-160;    and 

social  evolution,  149;  defined,  143- 

146,  150;  their  contents,  147-149. 
Processes  involved  in  social  evolution, 

163-165. 
Progress,  172,  173,  199,  212-214,  228- 

233 ;  indi\idual  and  social,  153, 223- 

225. 


Psychology  and  environment,  63-65. 
Psychology  of  Nations,  93,  94. 


QuATREFAGES  on  Human  Kingdom, 

292. 
Quesnay,  21. 
Qu^telet,  31,  260. 


Eanke,  L.  von,  on  use  of  historical 

documents,  259. 
Ratzel,  F.,  266. 

Ratzenhofer,  G.,  on  Sociology,  110. 
Rayleigh,  Lord,  on  materialism,  288. 
Reform,  251,  252. 
Riehl,   A.,  freedom  of  the  will,   19; 

natural  selection,  61. 
Riehl,  W.  H.,  83. 
Rome,  Ancient,   influence    on    social 

thought,  15,  39. 
Rousseau,  9,  21. 
Russia,  its  growing  influence,  320. 


Saint-Simon,  relation  to  Comte,  31f 
204. 

Savigny,  205. 

Schiiflle,  A.  E.  F.,  183, 187,  263;  limit 
of  sociological  knowledge,  292 ; 
study  of  the  social  condition,  231. 

Schiller  on  History,  22,  23,  24,  41. 

Schleicher,  113. 

Schliemann,  156. 

Schmoller,  G.,  on  physical  and  psy- 
chical processes,  289. 

Schonberg,  G.,  87. 

Schulze-Gaevernitz,  G.  von,  organic 
development,  148. 

Science  and  association,  276,  277. 

Science  and  philosophy,  277-279. 

Science,  its  limitations,  275-277;  tech- 
nical sense,  277. 

Seminar,  subjects  for,  323-329. 

Seth,  James,  198,  269. 

Sidgwick,  H.,  269. 

Simcox,  E.  J.,  267. 


INDEX. 


335 


Simmel,  G.,  social  phenomena,  198. 

Social  achievement  and  inheritance, 
308,  309;  action,  its  effects,  156,  157; 
and  private  action,  123-126;  and  pri- 
vate personality,  127-130;  and  soci- 
ological, distinction  between,  113, 
\U,  300,  301;  characteristics,  249, 
250,  310,  311;  causation,  256,  257; 
classification,  303,  304;  energies  in 
evolution,  175-177;  energies  the 
social  substance,  257  ;  evolution, 
162-164;  evolution,  factors  in,  187- 
189;  evolution,  how  studied,  177- 
180;  evolution,  richness  of  content, 
186;  experiments,  262;  forces  and 
nationality,  301-303;  forces,  condi- 
tion of  organization,  142 ;  forces, 
relative  dominance,  190-192,  307; 
groups,  54,  55,  70 ;  growth,  effect  on 
social  thought,  18 ;  its  meaning,  153, 
154;  laws,  174;  mind,  the,  151, 152; 
perfection,  the  aim  of  social  prog- 
ress, 217-219;  physics,  107,  129; 
principles  and  social  evolution,  166, 
167;  products,  55;  science  and  the 
social  sciences,  75-77,  97-101;  study 
in  history.  269,  270;  thought  in 
modern  times,  16-18,  21,  22;  unity 
and  social  differentiation,  163. 

Socialism,  130,  312,  317. 

Sociation,  127-142;  its  definition,  127- 
129 ;  its  process,  140-142. 

Society,  idea  of  among  the  Greeks, 
13,  14,  39;  and  manhood,  4;  and 
personal  freedom,  132, 133;  and  self- 
hood, 2,  3;  and  social  phenomena, 
110;  and  societies,  5-6,  37,  38;  and 
the  educated,  4,  5;  and  youth,  3; 
an  organism,  70,  136,  150-152,  2l2, 
213;  as  a  system  of  forces,  136; 
composed  of  social  forces,  54,  55-56, 
128, 129,  137,  138,  144,  145;  defined, 
46;  difficulty  of  the  conception,  2, 
6,  39,  40 ;  genesis  of  the  idea  of,  1- 
43;  how  its  conception  arises  in  the 
individual,  2-8  ;  its  idea  how  found, 
111 ;  not  dependent  on  individuals, 


134,  135;  per  se,  244-246,  248,  249; 
science  of,  45. 

Sociological  and  economic  view,  112, 
185;  inquiry,  its  limits,  56-66,  68,  69; 
literature,  40-43;  specialization,  68. 

Sociology  and  biology,  59 ;  and  evolu- 
tion, 59-62;  and  institutions,  111; 
and  metaphj'sics,  58  ;  and  philology, 
101, 112, 113;  and  political  economy, 
84-88;  and  political  science,  78-83; 
and  psychology,  62-65;  and  science, 
273,  274;  and  theology,  65. 

Sociology,  definition,  44-53;  division, 
109-114;  division  of  labor  in,  67,  68; 
not  a  grouping  of  social  disciplines, 
97-101 ;  origin  of,  36,  37  ;  reason  for 
its  separate  treatment,  73-75;  re- 
lation to  history,  88-93 ;  a  science 
in  what  sense,  279-281 ;  its  scientific 
character,  how  determined,  282-285; 
its  scope,  53-71;  static  and  dynamic, 
106,107;  its  subject-matter,  52,56; 
what  it  includes,  51-53,  55. 

Socrates,  227;  humanism  of,  14;  in- 
fluence on  method,  257 ;  view  of  the 
state,  13. 

Spencer,  Herbert,  Descriptive  Soci- 
ology, 107,  108;  ethical  discussion 
in  Sociology,  206 ;  on  social  evolu- 
tion, 193-198;  on  matter,  force, 
and  motion,  287;  on  social  statics, 
106  ;  on  stud)'  of  Sociology,  265;  on 
the  use  of  the  tenn  "science," 
275,  281;  his  view  of  society,  52, 
110,  148,  184. 

Spinoza,  152. 

Sprague,  F.  W.,  on  social  evolution, 
293. 

State,  The,  78-83 ;  its  ethical  mission, 
223 ;  literature  on,  83 ;  its  origin, 
10-12;  its  prominence  in  Greek 
thought,  13 ;  a  society,  52. 

Stein,  Lorenz  von,  on  Sociology,  69. 

Steinthiil,  H.,  psychology'  of  nations, 
93,  269. 

Stephen,  Leslie,  269;  prevision,  108; 
social  organism,  52, 120 ;  society,  160. 


336 


INDEX. 


Stoics,  social  thought  of  the,  15. 
Struggle  for  existence,  175. 
Supernational  bonds,  187. 
Sussmilch,  260. 

Tarde,  G.,  on  imitation,  170. 

Tauler  on  society,  133. 

Teleological  action,  155,  214,  215,  226, 

227 ;  and  natural  law,  255,  256. 
Tertullian,  20. 
Tolstoi,  302. 
Tonnies,  F.,  47. 
Trail,  H.  D.,  268. 

Treitschke,  H.  von,  on  Sociology,  83. 
Turgot,  forerunner  of  Comte,  21,  30, 

31. 
Tylor,    E.   B.,  history,  92,   183,  266; 

natural  causation,  292. 

Ultimate  problems,  241, 242, 286, 287. 
Unconscious  action,  170,  171. 
United  States,  social  influence  of,  318, 
319. 


Unorganized   society,  69,  70;  impor- 
tance of,  267,  268. 
Unit  of  force,  176,  177. 
Unity  and  differentiation,  163. 


Vico  on  the  science  of  history,  20,  40. 
Vinet,  representative  of  individualism, 

153. 
Voltaire.  21. 


Wagnek,  a.,  economic  function  of  the 

state,  87. 
Wtintig,  H.,  on  Comte,  31,  41,  42. 
Ward,  L.  F.,  ethics,  233 ;  social  forces, 

200;  Sociology,  65,66,  273. 
Westermarck,  E.,  on  marriage,  266. 
Whitney,  W.  D.,  on  linguistics,  112. 
Will  in  ethics,  251. 
Williams,  C.  M.,  269. 
Wilson,  D.,  on  prehistoric  man,  266. 
Wundt,  W.,  ethics  and  method,  263, 

269. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


OCT  i     — 


TO^URL 


n^ 


REC'D  LD-URl 

URL     DEC  171900 

OEC  1 3  ,36e 


Form  L9 — 15m-10, '48(31039)444 


LOS  ANGELES 
LIBRARY 


HM 


LONDON 

BOOK    CO. 

644 

VlARKET  St. 

>.( 


